2019 UDFA NEWS and Signings

[Dantés]

I question it because like many others on this forum people just seem to think NFL ready kickers are a dime a dozen. I get it he's overpaid, that's what Russ Ball is for. He'll make his $3.6M this year and after that they can find a much better team friendly deal for under $2.75M

Questioning someone's fandom because they think an overpaid, underperforming kicker should be replaced is either master trollery or incredibly stupid. Which one describes you?

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

Neither, when jettisoning said player for playing roulette with whoever is available on the street is incredibly stupid. You ever think sometimes NFL GMs just have to work with what they have? Yes, the Packers have brought in some competition, but honestly all they are doing is throwing something to the wall and hoping it sticks, the odds are that it won't. Crosby's in the last year of his contract, cutting him to sign this mythical free agent that doesn't exist while having an unreliable kicker is again....incredibly stupid.

 

[Dantés]

Neither, when jettisoning said player for playing roulette with whoever is available on the street is incredibly stupid. You ever think sometimes NFL GMs just have to work with what they have? Yes, the Packers have brought in some competition, but honestly all they are doing is throwing something to the wall and hoping it sticks, the odds are that it won't. Crosby's in the last year of his contract, cutting him to sign this mystical free agent that doesn't exist while having an unreliable kicker is again....incredibly stupid.

No one advocated for that. I have Crosby on my projected 53 man roster. I have doubted that Ficken or Tracy can unseat him.

But the facts remain that he is a) bad and b) overpaid. Thus he ought to be replaced. I don't think the team has done what was necessary to accomplish that this offseason, but maybe I'll be surprised. Certainly next offseason they should find a new kicker.

And again, if you decide that this calls by Packer fandom into question then you're being an idiot.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

Crosby isn't bad when only one kicker in team history has a better career percentage than him. Yes, other kickers in the NFL are better, but to say that Crosby is holding us back from a SB is a reach. If he's so bad, tell that to team front offices of the past, as they clearly put the idea of a world beater of a kicker on the backburner.

The money is spent, let it go. If there were a plethora of suitable replacements it's one thing, but there aren't. Crosby's entire situation is moot and has been for the last 2 seasons. That's why I question anybody bringing it up in general. We might as well be arguing why AR doesn't have more MVPs.

 

[GleefulGary]

Why not use his percentages compared to his current NFL peers? That makes a lot more sense.

 

[Dantés]

Crosby isn't bad when only one kicker in team history has a better career percentage than him. Yes, other kickers in the NFL are better, but to say that Crosby is holding us back from a SB is a reach. If he's so bad, tell that to team front offices of the past, as they clearly put the idea of a world beater of a kicker on the backburner.

The money is spent, let it go. If there were a plethora of suitable replacements it's one thing, but there aren't. Crosby's entire situation is moot and has been for the last 2 seasons. That's why I question anybody bringing it up in general. We might as well be arguing why AR doesn't have more MVPs.

Who said that Crosby is the thing holding us back from a Super Bowl?

I laid out in very clear terms why Crosby can fairly be characterized as a "bad" kicker over the last two seasons. Go back and look at what I've actually said, read it, and try again.

Or better yet, don't be so sensitive and spare us any further commentary.

 

[Dantés]

Why not use his percentages compared to his current NFL peers? That makes a lot more sense.

THAT'S NOT WHAT REAL PACKER FANS DO!!!

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

Why not use his percentages compared to his current NFL peers? That makes a lot more sense.

Sure, why not, have at it. I've already acknowledged that he ranks in the bottom-half of the league. That doesn't take away from the fact that historically the Packers have been successful without a kicker who has a 85-90% average.

If you guys had a REASONABLE solution, I'm all ears to accepting your opinion. But the "he's overpaid, cut him" position is a limp one at best.

Clay Matthews was overpaid....Nick Perry was overpaid....meet their new replacements in Gary and the Smiths.

Mason Crosby is overpaid....meet his new replacement in.....Cole Tracy?

I'm sure you can connect the dots from there.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

There's no doubt the Packers could have troubles finding an adequate replacement for Crosby but it's definitely easier to make it work at kicker than most other positions. Packers fans are fast to advocate getting rid of underperforming players yet there is a sentiment that it's difficult to adequately replace a below average kicker being paid like an elite one. I really don't get it.

I actually disagree with this and here is why. You are saying go out and sign an unproven UDFA to replace Crosby. Basically, sign a guy with little or no NFL experience. What guarantees do you have there? What percentage of those guys actually work out? You like to point out the few that do, but not all those that failed. Is that what the Packers do when they need a starter at Safety or OLB? Now if you were so unhappy with Crosby and you wanted a better shot at getting a more accurate kicker, you would be advocating to go out and sign or trade for a top kicker, but that is going to cost more than Crosby.

Second, I actually liken Kickers to Golfers. Most of their game is mental. When they get to a certain level of play, they all have the mechanics and ability to hit every shot. The great kickers are still going to miss kicks that 9 out of 10 times they make and the key for them is getting their mental game back after a miss. Those that stick around long enough and sign a second contract are going to be making close to or more than Crosby.

The new kickers in the league seem to struggle with this aspect (mental game) the most. The ones that eventually are successful at doing it, aren't making less money than Crosby because they are worse, its because they are still on rookie deals. So to be fair, you need to compare Crosby's salaries with other veterans, because those are all guys who have gotten over the hump of the mental part of the game from time to time in their careers.

Packers can definitely cut Crosby, pay Ficken $495K and save a few Million, but given the history of the position, Ficken will most likely be one of many kickers the Packers have as they search for the long term guy and in the meantime, if you are unhappy with Crosby's misses, fasten your seat belt, because you may be in for a bumpy ride.

 

[Dantés]

Sure, why not, have at it. I've already acknowledged that he ranks in the bottom-half of the league. That doesn't take away from the fact that historically the Packers have been successful without a kicker who has a 85-90% average.

If you guys had a REASONABLE solution, I'm all ears to accepting your opinion. But the "he's overpaid, cut him" position is a limp one at best.

Clay Matthews was overpaid....Nick Perry was overpaid....meet their new replacements in Gary and the Smiths.

Mason Crosby is overpaid....meet his new replacement in.....Cole Tracy?

I'm sure you can connect the dots from there.

Here's what's "limp"-- your ability to interact with what people are actually saying in favor of telling them that they're saying something they aren't so that you can tee off on said straw man.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

So, you went out of your way to compare Crosby to a kicker who was cut to prove what exactly? That he's the perfect man for the job? Do tell.....

 

[Dantés]

So, you went out of your way to compare Crosby to a kicker who was cut to prove what exactly? That he's the perfect man for the job? Do tell.....

That he is overpaid and underperforming and ought to be replaced... why is this so hard for you to understand?

Pkrjones said that the Bears would jump at the chance to have Crosby. I pointed out that Crosby and Parkey, who the Bears cut, were basically comparable.

Is that alright with you, or did I unknowingly forfeit my Packer fan card? Lol...

 

[PackFan2]

There's two spots left. They currently have 88 men, including the undrafted free agents. 2 out of the 20 tryout guys will crack the 90. Darrius Hayward (WR-North Dakota) has punt return experience. And probably the Kicker from LSU take those two slots, IMO.

Darrius Shepherd* lol

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

Packers claim WR Jawill Davis off waivers from the Giants.

Receivers, Running Backs, Kick Returners, Oh My!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Packers claim WR Jawill Davis off waivers from the Giants.

Receivers, Running Backs, Kick Returners, Oh My!

Awesome, they can save some money on his new jersey too and just give him #11

Missing LINK! SUPER BOWL HERE WE COME!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

For what it's worth, he did register some catches with the Giants. He could be the missing link. Plus get this:

40: 4.37
Bench: 14
Vertical: 39
Broad: 10.4

He's a little taller than Cobb, but a thinner frame. But he has some NFL experience and did decent on returns. He might be the one to stick above all the other hopefuls.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I hope he turns out to be great, but given that he was getting paid minimum for a second year UDFA and the Giants, a 5-11 team last year, didn't keep him on a 90 man roster, says quite a bit to me. But hey, new team, new life for him. Hope he makes the best of it.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

I hope he turns out to be great, but given that he was getting paid minimum for a second year UDFA and the Giants, a 5-11 team last year, didn't keep him on a 90 man roster, says quite a bit to me. But hey, new team, new life for him. Hope he makes the best of it.

You're forgetting that the Giants now have Jabrill Peppers from the OBJ trade, and they drafted Darius Slayton from Auburn in the 5th Round who also had KR experience in college and was a pretty explosive WR in the SEC but his production suffered due to scheme.

I'm not sure why they jettisoned him though as OBJ is a pretty big hole to fill given their current roster but he dislocated his knee dancing in the locker room which is pretty embarrassing.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Crosby is still one of the better cold weather kickers in the league.

He's made 17/22 in weather below 40 degrees since 2014, which is the 2nd best rate in the league among kickers with 15 or more attempts. That's per Michael Cohen.

I would love to replace Crosby with somebody better, but good cold weather kickers are not easy to find. They should still try to find a way to restructure that contract.

According to the numbers in the following link Crosby has made 41 of 51 (80.4%) field goals in weather below 40 degrees since 2014. All other kickers have combined for a percentage of 81.8%. Once again, Mason ranks below average although being used to kicking in cold weather.

https://www.pro-football-reference....gtlt=lt&temperature=40&c5val=1.0&order_by=fgm

I question it because like many others on this forum people just seem to think NFL ready kickers are a dime a dozen. I get it he's overpaid, that's what Russ Ball is for. He'll make his $3.6M this year and after that they can find a much better team friendly deal for under $2.75M

The Packers might hold on to Crosby this season but there's absolutely no reason to offer him another deal after the current one expires.

I'll agree with you on the Lutz move, but my only concern(and probably was the Packers as well) was that a guy who kicks in a dome or South Florida at least 10 out of 16 possible games in the regular season may not fair as well at Lambeau.

I have posted repeatedly that opposing kickers have combined for a better field goal percentage at Lambeau than Crosby.

We must be getting our stats from different sources. Yes Crosby has kicked for longer(roughly 50 games) than Longwell, but Longwell's career percentage with the Packers is 81.6%, Crosby's is 80.3%. Would that 1.3% difference have won us more games? Who's to say?

I had to look up Stenerud(born in 88) but his percentage over his short 3 year career was only 80.8% The next kicker I actually had in mind was Chris Jacke who had a career percentage of 77.2%. To be honest after doing more research nobody in Packers history seems to have a career percentage besting Longwell's. So that says to me traditionally that the Packers don't value having an All-Pro Kicker to win Super Bowls; and let's be honest, have we?

The difference between that those kickers played in different eras. Crosby is 3.4% below the league average in field goal percentage over his career while Longwell (2.8%) and Steered (13.5%) both performed better than their peers.

Nope, I get that Kicker/Punter may not have as much of an impact to the game as the QB position, but if you look at K/P signings across the league, most are retreads who didn't work out with their former team(s). Yes, every couple years some new blood sticks to replace guys who finally hang it up, but in my opinion you have far more darts to throw at the proverbial board at QB than you do at Kicker/Punter.

The point I was trying to make is that it doesn't take an early draft pick (most of the time it works out with an undrafted free agent) or a huge amount of money to adequately replace a below average kicker.

We analyze games differently and that's fine. Granted being overseas hampered my watching of the games with my usual eye, with the exception of Detroit(Yes he was horrible) and Arizona(which I honestly believe AR told him to miss it), we normally had a handful of possessions following Crosby's miss that had they ended in TDs instead of punts and field goal attempts would have changed the entire landscape of the game. I blame that more on MM and his abysmal offensive design than I do Crosby, call me biased.

Don't get me wrong, aside of the Lions game Crosby definitely wasn't one of the main reasons the Packers ended up not winning the game but he contributed to it without a doubt.

Crosby's in the last year of his contract, cutting him to sign this mythical free agent that doesn't exist while having an unreliable kicker is again....incredibly stupid.

It's probable there was at least one undrafted free agent kicker available after the draft who will perform on a higher level than Crosby in 2019.

The money is spent, let it go.

Actually the Packers could save more than $3 million in cap space by releasing Crosby before the start of this season.

That doesn't take away from the fact that historically the Packers have been successful without a kicker who has a 85-90% average.

If you guys had a REASONABLE solution, I'm all ears to accepting your opinion. But the "he's overpaid, cut him" position is a limp one at best.

Clay Matthews was overpaid....Nick Perry was overpaid....meet their new replacements in Gary and the Smiths.

The Packers would have been a better team with a kicker making 90% of the field goals. I don't understand your point about Matthews and Perry as Clay wasn't re-signed and Perry was released. I don't get Packers fans being absolutely fine with moving on from edge rushers but crying foul about replacing a below average kicker.

I actually disagree with this and here is why. You are saying go out and sign an unproven UDFA to replace Crosby. Basically, sign a guy with little or no NFL experience. What guarantees do you have there? What percentage of those guys actually work out? You like to point out the few that do, but not all those that failed. Is that what the Packers do when they need a starter at Safety or OLB? Now if you were so unhappy with Crosby and you wanted a better shot at getting a more accurate kicker, you would be advocating to go out and sign or trade for a top kicker, but that is going to cost more than Crosby.

Undrafted kickers that have been good enough to actually make an NFL roster have combined to perform at a higher level than Crosby over the past few seasons. It doesn't matter that it might take the Packers several attempts to find one of them as they have several months of time before the start of the regular season.

The ones that eventually are successful at doing it, aren't making less money than Crosby because they are worse, its because they are still on rookie deals. So to be fair, you need to compare Crosby's salaries with other veterans, because those are all guys who have gotten over the hump of the mental part of the game from time to time in their careers.

No, actually Crosby should be significantly better than kickers on rookie deals to justify paying him all that money. With that not being the case by any means the Packers should replace him with a cheaper one.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The Packers might hold on to Crosby this season but there's absolutely no reason to offer him another deal after the current one expires.

Good to see you have softened your stance a bit

Like I have said many times, I would love to have a kicker who is equally as good, if not better than Crosby, for less money. I just think the process of doing that is more difficult than the picture you are trying to paint. As well as the consequences of it failing, could potentially be detrimental enough, that the Packers don't want to risk taking the chance.

 

[Dantés]

Good to see you have softened your stance a bit

Like I have said many times, I would love to have a kicker who is equally as good, if not better than Crosby, for less money. I just think the process of doing that is more difficult than the picture you are trying to paint. As well as the consequences of it failing, could potentially be detrimental enough, that the Packers don't want to risk taking the chance.

I don't think it's all that difficult to replace a kicker of Crosby's caliber; I just don't think that the Packers have done what is necessary. Though we will see if either of these other guys surprise us. Having 3 kickers on the 90 man roster would seem to indicate that they're interested in the possibility.

Hey... come to think of it, I wonder if we should call the Packers' FO fandom into question? I mean, they seem to at least be toying with the idea of replacing Crosby.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Who is the 3rd Kicker? Cole Tracy was just brought in for a tryout, don't think they signed him.

Maybe the Packers FO is just trying to appease all the fans wanting to see Crosby gone?

Had they drafted Matt Gay before the Buccaneers grabbed him, I would say they are serious about replacing Crosby.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Good to see you have softened your stance a bit

I haven't softened my stance at all but don't expect the Packers to truly consider moving on from Crosby.

Though we will see if either of these other guys surprise us. Having 3 kickers on the 90 man roster would seem to indicate that they're interested in the possibility.

The Packers didn't sign Cole Tracy after rookie camp, meaning they only have two kickers on the roster in Crosby and Ficken.

 

[Dantés]

I haven't softened my stance at all but don't expect the Packers to truly consider moving on from Crosby.



The Packers didn't sign Cole Tracy after rookie camp, meaning they only have two kickers on the roster in Crosby and Ficken.

Ah... makes sense. I don't think he has the leg for this league. Though they may still bring kickers in. We shall see.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Ah... makes sense. I don't think he has the leg for this league. Though they may still bring kickers in. We shall see.

The Packers could appease you and Captain by convincing Crosby to take a pay cut equal to Cole Tracy's salary and keep them both. Mason to kick off and anything 50+ or in the playoffs.

Of course you have that whole 2nd roster spot.