Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 120
  1. #91
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,797
    We are one good offseason from being one of the 3 favorites. We need to bring in another CB, another pass rusher and hopefully a new pass catching weapon.

    If we were to sign a free agent corner, then draft a pass rusher at 14, I think our defense is going to be solid. Sure, we need improvement from king. We need this year Randall, not last year and we need the opposite from haha. He needs to play like 2 years ago instead of like last year.

    Our offense could use some re-enforcements, but I donít think it needs to be anything crazy. I know some people want Jarvis Landry or another big name WR, but I think bringing in a young guy in the draft and maybe grab a lesser tier free agent or sign a tight end upgrade, weíll be fine.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    244
    Once the extend Rodgers and fix the WR situation of Jordy/Cobb to their liking, we can get a better picture of what can be done in the offseason.

    Unless for some reason Sammy Watkins leaves the Rams to pursue other options, I don't really see a lot of WR's that change our landscape. There are however an abundance of TE's, Corner's, Olinemen, and Linebackers (especially ILB) that are somewhat enticing and could shore up some much needed depth and veteran leadership.

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Schofield, WI
    Posts
    1,888
    Maybe Sammy Watkins can turn things around but he looked pedestrian much of the year with LA. I agree with hallzi and crew. This team isn't that far off. Yeah it seems like it because AR was out and the roster looked meh for most part, but it doesn't take much to turn things around. I think this team needs a young CB and a vet for nickel that is better than trash house. Then get as many OLBs as possible and an ILB too to pair with Blake in draft if Smith from GA lasts or take Kirk from A&M to make AR happy if he falls. I wouldn't mind Jackson the CB frm Iowa either then trade up and get a rush-end. Also hopefully find a mismatch TE as well somewhere.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    244
    Quote Originally Posted by gopackgo87 View Post
    Maybe Sammy Watkins can turn things around but he looked pedestrian much of the year with LA.
    I think he took some heavy coverage which helped Kupp and Woods emerge as stars this season. I also think he would fit better within our structure of throwing more to WR's. He has great hands and good athleticism. Although if Jordy stays put there might not be an in for him both in $ and position.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    244
    I have to say that for all the talk about Elliot Wolf and whether or not he should have been the GM over Gutenkust. It seems very apparent to me that if that were the case, teams would be flopping over each other right now to snag him. But the only real report of interest in him comes from the Browns who already have Dorsey in place meaning he would just be jumping organizations rather than being promoted. This tells me realistically he might not be ready to make the jump yet.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    iowa
    Posts
    6,918
    Could be everyone was speculating it was Wolf's job to lose so they didn't set any interviews up with him.

    RIP Gene Wilder

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona
    Posts
    29,650
    If you're going to build your roster through the draft, which i am perfectly fine with obviously, then you better nail your picks. Cause if you ignore FA and just hope draft picks will solve the problems we have and the picks turn out to be crap then nothing will change and this team will continue to be mediocre.

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,797
    Hereís my assessment of how ted operated. He was a draft and develop guy, but thereís nothing inherently wrong with that. The biggest flaw for ted was his inability to adapt.

    At the peak of his ďpowersĒ teds drafts were great. He was considered a BPA git, which I actually think it false. I think teds drafts actively looked forward at the roster. The goal with the first few rounds wasnít BPA, but was actually to draft a replacement for a guy in a year or two. Which meant he was usually drafting into a position of strength, not weakness, so it appears to be BPA. Picks like Randall Cobb, Jordy Nelson, James Jones, Demarious Randall, Mike Neal and a bunch others were examples of that.

    Basically you draft a guy at a position where you have a vet whoís contract is due up at least a year before that contract is due up. That allows you to analyze the guy in your system for a year. If he looks good, then you let the vet go (Greg Jennings, Casey Hayward and Cullen Jenkins are examples of that to varying degrees of success). If the young guy underwhelms, you resign the vet (keeping Hawk all these years is an example of that.) Then in the late rounds, you take BPA and hope you get a big hit so you donít need to draft a guy early the next few years.

    But 3 major chinks in the armor showed all around the same time. The first was a bad player eval in assuming neal could replace Jenkins. The 2nd and 3rd were both injuries to players who were core players (i.e. guys we werenít drafting replacements for because we were expecting them to be around for awhile. Those guys were Collins and Finley.

    So thatís where my biggest issue with ted lies. He was too late to adjust. It took him a year or two to finally draft haha to replace Collins. And he didnít really replace Finley with anything besides rich Rodgers in the third and then finally cook and Bennett the last two years. Then, because of those misses, weíve had to draft more for immediate need (guys like Datone and worthy on the DL) to fill those roles. That whole thing builds momentum. Now when youíre drafting for immediate need, you canít also use early picks on future needs. So you risk the depth of the roster as well.

    So all in all, draft and develop is a fantastic strategy. No one is perfect in the draft, so if you can get out ahead of free agent decisions and draft a replacement a year before you have to make that call, it gives you that extra year of data. Plus, it should help overall roster depth. But you need to be willing to dive into veteran free agents when you have injuries or miss on a pick. Ted want willing to do that last part.

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,844
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    Hereís my assessment of how ted operated. He was a draft and develop guy, but thereís nothing inherently wrong with that. The biggest flaw for ted was his inability to adapt.

    At the peak of his ďpowersĒ teds drafts were great. He was considered a BPA git, which I actually think it false. I think teds drafts actively looked forward at the roster. The goal with the first few rounds wasnít BPA, but was actually to draft a replacement for a guy in a year or two. Which meant he was usually drafting into a position of strength, not weakness, so it appears to be BPA. Picks like Randall Cobb, Jordy Nelson, James Jones, Demarious Randall, Mike Neal and a bunch others were examples of that.

    Basically you draft a guy at a position where you have a vet whoís contract is due up at least a year before that contract is due up. That allows you to analyze the guy in your system for a year. If he looks good, then you let the vet go (Greg Jennings, Casey Hayward and Cullen Jenkins are examples of that to varying degrees of success). If the young guy underwhelms, you resign the vet (keeping Hawk all these years is an example of that.) Then in the late rounds, you take BPA and hope you get a big hit so you donít need to draft a guy early the next few years.

    But 3 major chinks in the armor showed all around the same time. The first was a bad player eval in assuming neal could replace Jenkins. The 2nd and 3rd were both injuries to players who were core players (i.e. guys we werenít drafting replacements for because we were expecting them to be around for awhile. Those guys were Collins and Finley.

    So thatís where my biggest issue with ted lies. He was too late to adjust. It took him a year or two to finally draft haha to replace Collins. And he didnít really replace Finley with anything besides rich Rodgers in the third and then finally cook and Bennett the last two years. Then, because of those misses, weíve had to draft more for immediate need (guys like Datone and worthy on the DL) to fill those roles. That whole thing builds momentum. Now when youíre drafting for immediate need, you canít also use early picks on future needs. So you risk the depth of the roster as well.

    So all in all, draft and develop is a fantastic strategy. No one is perfect in the draft, so if you can get out ahead of free agent decisions and draft a replacement a year before you have to make that call, it gives you that extra year of data. Plus, it should help overall roster depth. But you need to be willing to dive into veteran free agents when you have injuries or miss on a pick. Ted want willing to do that last part.
    i think thats actually a pretty good assessment. when rollins and randall had good years and let hayward go that really effed up our defense. having both picks regress made us waste a lot of resources trying to fill holes

  10. #100
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bolingbrook, IL
    Posts
    6,440
    So Murphy said that BG, MM, and Ball all report to him. BG controls the roster and Ball controlls the cap and negotiations. BG does not have the power to fire MM.

    I would have liked to see Ball reporting to BG and not Murphy, There is the possibility now of a power struggle where BG wants a free agent and Ball does not because it doesn't work with the cap. Murphy would now have to mediate these situations

  11. #101
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,797
    I would be interested in what balls actually responsibility is. Heís technically executive Vice President, so Iím not sure exactly what he does. They indicated that Gutekunst has full control over the roster, so I have to imagine that he makes the final call on free agents, not ball. But Iím sure ball will be heavily involved in the negotiations and contract structure to maintain cap flexibility. But from my understanding, if Gutekunst says we are signing this guy, we are signing him regardless of balls opinion. Maybe thatís wrong, but that was my impression.

  12. #102
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bolingbrook, IL
    Posts
    6,440
    This article is pretty good about the new restructure of the front office.

    In the new structure, Gutekunst and Ballís relationship will be tested most. Gutekunstís primary responsibility will be player acquisition and retention, while Ballís will be the salary cap. The two duties are connected, but will be split between two individuals.

    If they arenít in lockstep, a situation could arise where Gutekunst wants to sign a player, but Ball doesnít believe the necessary contract works within the Packersí cap. Murphy left open the possibility he might have to be an arbitrator, though he hopes Gutekunst and Ball could work out any dispute between them.

    If an agreement canít be reached, Murphy said he would side with Gutekunst on personnel matters.
    It sounds like Gutekunst would win any real battles over player acquisition, but there is the potential for them to clash over these types of issues.

    http://www.packersnews.com/story/spo...gm/1012881001/

  13. #103
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    244
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    I would be interested in what balls actually responsibility is. Heís technically executive Vice President, so Iím not sure exactly what he does. They indicated that Gutekunst has full control over the roster, so I have to imagine that he makes the final call on free agents, not ball. But Iím sure ball will be heavily involved in the negotiations and contract structure to maintain cap flexibility. But from my understanding, if Gutekunst says we are signing this guy, we are signing him regardless of balls opinion. Maybe thatís wrong, but that was my impression.
    It kinda doesn't really make much sense in terms of FA. Ball seems to essentially run the cap and he will have to be involved in the negotiating process, which is essentially Free Agency. So while Gutenkust can bring in the players and want them, Ball is gonna be the guy doing the negotiating. The entire thing seems weird, but Ball was already in this position of power with Ted at the helm wasn't he?

  14. #104
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,797
    Thatís really the part of the new structure I donít understand. With a rookie GM, Iím okay with the coach reporting to Murphy. I know some orgs like the Steelers do that.

    It makes sense because if the new GM is garbage but you like the coach, you donít risk losing him. A bad gm is likely to blame and fire the coaching staff to try to save himself. This structure prevents that if ďownershipĒ likes the coach (in this case itís the CEO).

    Now the ball thing doesnít make sense. Seems like the cap responsibilities part of balls job should fall under Gutekunst. Iím sure thereís more to the EVP title than just contract negotiations with players. So on everything non player related, it would make sense to have ball report to Murphy. But on the free agent front, it should be all Gutekunst. I get if ball is a shrewd negotiator and is good at manipulating contracts to fit the cap better, then let him do the physical negotiation. But BG should be giving the guidelines, like my preferred deal is 3 years for $8 mill per year and Iím willing to go up tot $10 per year. But if they ask for a 4th year, then my max per year is $8 mill. And let ball work his magic within those guidelines. But letting ball set the limits is probably dangerous if he and BG donít see eye to eye.

    And ball is such an odd case. A lot of folks say he was getting more and more power in free agency under ted. But it appears that is hard to verify or understand exactly what that means. One on hand, last year was our most active year in feee agency. So if ball was more involved, that could be a good sign. But on the flip side, reports came out that mike blamed ball for not signing more guys. So itís hard to flush out what is actually true. Was ted telling ball what to do and ball fell on the sword to an extent and took blame internally? Or did ted essentially give ball free reign in free agency for multiple years as long as he was mindful of the cap?

  15. #105
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bolingbrook, IL
    Posts
    6,440
    It sounds like Ball had a lot of power with regards to free agents under Ted. Like choosing to not resign Hyde and Peppers. I would hope he doesn't have that power with Gutenkust, but the new front office structure doesn't tell me that.

    Ball got promoted, but hopefully it is just a promotion in title and he actually has less power/responsibility when it comes to some of this stuff.

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •