Best offseason in the NFC north

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
It's a common practice at this time to do it for top draft picks. This is nothing special.
Apparently you missed the little detail that he blew out his ACL before he signed a contract. Since you believe it's common practice, I look forward to your long list of draftees being offered fully guaranteed contracts in those circumstances.
 

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,169
Reaction score
439
Location
Vero Beach, FL
Vikings usually win the SB during the off season. Year after year lately it seems they will be title contenders until the games count.
Which is funny, because I can't remember anyone saying they would be close to a Super Bowl the last 4 years. Another myth by Packer fans.
 

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
7,547
Reaction score
2,689
Location
PENDING
Which is funny, because I can't remember anyone saying they would be close to a Super Bowl the last 4 years. Another myth by Packer fans.
Come on. You are normally better than this.

" Usually win the Superbowl in the offseason" is not the same as "picked to win the Superbowl". Clearly Poppa was speaking of a metaphorical superbowl for having the best offseason.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Well, let's see. If the Jags don't offer him a contract, I believe he becomes a UFA. So they have to offer him something. They only have so many days to sign him. Being the 3rd pick, they are pretty much stuck on what they can pay him. Making the contract guaranteed does not hurt the Jags in the salary cap in anyway. Making a possible star player happy is good business. He is at the moment the 12th highest paid player on the Jags. Making the first contract of the top draft picks guaranteed is not that far fetched. Blake Bortles is. Anthoney Barrs is. Odell Beckhams is. It's a common practice at this time to do it for top draft picks. This is nothing special.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000350347/article/2014-nfl-draft-firstround-signing-tracker
Well, those last 3 names you mentioned did not blow out an ACL and slated to miss 1/4 of the term of the contract before a fully guaranteed contract was even signed.

You rightly note the Jags were somewhat hamstrung in terms of options. That's beside the point. You seem to recognize that the CBA guaranteed that he'd get a total contract value in that area. The total value of the contracts and signing bonuses drop in fairly regular increments as we move down from the top of the draft board. Fowler was bound to get that $15.3 mil signing bonus, plus or minus some very small amount, as fully guaranteed money, no matter what the Jags might want to do.

It's only that the rest of the deal was guaranteed is surprising, and sidesteps the broader point.

Whether the guarantee was $15.3 mil or $23.5 mil, that kind of money being guaranteed before a contract is signed, with the pending hire having a serious temporary (if not permanent) disability, is rare on this planet and may be entirely unique.

Football players have short careers. So do movie actresses; nobody defends the seeming unfairness except other movie actresses. Roofers, garbage men, coal miners, et. al., work in dangerous professions or ones where there is are high disability rates at relatively young ages. They might get workers comp; maybe not.

When a football player has already pocketed something like $50 mil, has a contract to play for over $13 mil for the next year even if it is not guaranteed, and said player won't come to OTAs without a renegotiated deal with guarantees, that does not surprise me, and quite frankly I can't blame him. Business is business and negotiating can be hardball. What I don't understand is how any fan would sympathize with said player's "plight".

There are kids on practice squads who get paid relative peanuts, work week-to-week without any guarantee and could be out of the league at any time, and might not even be able to read, as the adults around them looked the other way, pushing them through schools so they could play their sport while convincing them it was all OK. I might feel bad for one of those kids regarding his lifelong earnings prospects, depending on his personal circumstance, but certainly not Adrian Peterson or Dante Fowler.
 

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,169
Reaction score
439
Location
Vero Beach, FL
Well, those last 3 names you mentioned did not blow out an ACL and slated to miss 1/4 of the term of the contract before a fully guaranteed contract was even signed.

You rightly note the Jags were somewhat hamstrung in terms of options. That's beside the point. You seem to recognize that the CBA guaranteed that he'd get a total contract value in that area. The total value of the contracts and signing bonuses drop in fairly regular increments as we move down from the top of the draft board. Fowler was bound to get that $15.3 mil signing bonus, plus or minus some very small amount, as fully guaranteed money, no matter what the Jags might want to do.

It's only that the rest of the deal was guaranteed is surprising, and sidesteps the broader point.

Whether the guarantee was $15.3 mil or $23.5 mil, that kind of money being guaranteed before a contract is signed, with the pending hire having a serious temporary (if not permanent) disability, is rare on this planet and may be entirely unique.

Football players have short careers. So do movie actresses; nobody defends the seeming unfairness except other movie actresses. Roofers, garbage men, coal miners, et. al., work in dangerous professions or ones where there is are high disability rates at relatively young ages. They might get workers comp; maybe not.

When a football player has already pocketed something like $50 mil, has a contract to play for over $13 mil for the next year even if it is not guaranteed, and said player won't come to OTAs without a renegotiated deal with guarantees, that does not surprise me, and quite frankly I can't blame him. Business is business and negotiating can be hardball. What I don't understand is how any fan would sympathize with said player's "plight".

There are kids on practice squads who get paid relative peanuts, work week-to-week without any guarantee and could be out of the league at any time, and might not even be able to read, as the adults around them looked the other way, pushing them through schools so they could play their sport while convincing them it was all OK. I might feel bad for one of those kids regarding his lifelong earnings prospects, depending on his personal circumstance, but certainly not Adrian Peterson or Dante Fowler.
My point being, the Jags would have guaranteed the contract had he not torn his ACL. To me it's in the Jags best interest to do so. Otherwise they could be seen as taking advantage of the situation. And that could do more harm down the line in signing other players. Don't get me wrong, I think it is great that they did it, but is does not surprise me in any way.
 

bigbubbatd

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
1,679
Reaction score
166
I am just trying to figure out what is well above average in Minnesota. Their defense was fine but they were behind the Packers in yards per play (including tied in yards per rush where Packer fans find our defense atrocious), 3rd down defense, interceptions, fumbles recovered, and tied in sacks. Their offense is absolutely average. AP would given them a better rushing game but look at their offense compared to GB. Where are they really better than the Packers on offense? Maybe TE if Rudolph could actually stay healthy but he cant. Is a 30 year old AP that much better than Lacy? Compare their last full season. Lacy had more total yards and more yards per carry. But Green Bay is substantially better at QB, WR, and OL
 

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,169
Reaction score
439
Location
Vero Beach, FL
I am just trying to figure out what is well above average in Minnesota. Their defense was fine but they were behind the Packers in yards per play (including tied in yards per rush where Packer fans find our defense atrocious), 3rd down defense, interceptions, fumbles recovered, and tied in sacks. Their offense is absolutely average. AP would given them a better rushing game but look at their offense compared to GB. Where are they really better than the Packers on offense? Maybe TE if Rudolph could actually stay healthy but he cant. Is a 30 year old AP that much better than Lacy? Compare their last full season. Lacy had more total yards and more yards per carry. But Green Bay is substantially better at QB, WR, and OL
Right. They are not better in anything. Yet. But remember, they had a new coach, new DC, new OC, 8 new starters on defense. Rookie QB. Banged up TE, Banged up OL. Missing their best player. Well they did beat the Packers in QB rating in the Red Zone. ;)

The Packers and Vikings shouldn't even be close on defense. Yet they are. What was the points per game given up?
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Right. They are not better in anything. Yet. But remember, they had a new coach, new DC, new OC, 8 new starters on defense. Rookie QB. Banged up TE, Banged up OL. Missing their best player. Well they did beat the Packers in QB rating in the Red Zone. ;)

The Packers and Vikings shouldn't even be close on defense. Yet they are. What was the points per game given up?

Rodgers threw 24 TD passes in the red zone last year compared to 11 by the Vikings though. Minnesota gave up an average of 21.4 points compared to the Packers´ 21.8.
 

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
7,547
Reaction score
2,689
Location
PENDING
That would explain it.

Guess he finally got the hint that no one is on his side
Why isnt there at least one Harriet Tubmann to get him out of there? Where is a modern day Abe Lincoln to set this man free?!?!?!! Dear God have mercy on us all that we should sit idle while this man suffers so.
 

Pack-12

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 17, 2013
Messages
155
Reaction score
8
Well, those last 3 names you mentioned did not blow out an ACL and slated to miss 1/4 of the term of the contract before a fully guaranteed contract was even signed.

You rightly note the Jags were somewhat hamstrung in terms of options. That's beside the point. You seem to recognize that the CBA guaranteed that he'd get a total contract value in that area. The total value of the contracts and signing bonuses drop in fairly regular increments as we move down from the top of the draft board. Fowler was bound to get that $15.3 mil signing bonus, plus or minus some very small amount, as fully guaranteed money, no matter what the Jags might want to do.

It's only that the rest of the deal was guaranteed is surprising, and sidesteps the broader point.

Whether the guarantee was $15.3 mil or $23.5 mil, that kind of money being guaranteed before a contract is signed, with the pending hire having a serious temporary (if not permanent) disability, is rare on this planet and may be entirely unique.

Football players have short careers. So do movie actresses; nobody defends the seeming unfairness except other movie actresses. Roofers, garbage men, coal miners, et. al., work in dangerous professions or ones where there is are high disability rates at relatively young ages. They might get workers comp; maybe not.

When a football player has already pocketed something like $50 mil, has a contract to play for over $13 mil for the next year even if it is not guaranteed, and said player won't come to OTAs without a renegotiated deal with guarantees, that does not surprise me, and quite frankly I can't blame him. Business is business and negotiating can be hardball. What I don't understand is how any fan would sympathize with said player's "plight".

There are kids on practice squads who get paid relative peanuts, work week-to-week without any guarantee and could be out of the league at any time, and might not even be able to read, as the adults around them looked the other way, pushing them through schools so they could play their sport while convincing them it was all OK. I might feel bad for one of those kids regarding his lifelong earnings prospects, depending on his personal circumstance, but certainly not Adrian Peterson or Dante Fowler.

Fowler likely signed something before practicing without a contract that said the Jags have to negotiate fairly if there was an injury and I believe the #3 overall pick got a fully guaranteed contract last year so it's not really that crazy to me that he got his contract guaranteed.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,815
Reaction score
936
Rodgers threw 24 TD passes in the red zone last year compared to 11 by the Vikings though. Minnesota gave up an average of 21.4 points compared to the Packers´ 21.8.

It should be noted though that the Viking's defense played the Packer's offense twice while the Packer's defense got to play Christian Ponder once...that probably skews things by at least a dozen points, right?
 

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,169
Reaction score
439
Location
Vero Beach, FL
It should be noted though that the Viking's defense played the Packer's offense twice while the Packer's defense got to play Christian Ponder once...that probably skews things by at least a dozen points, right?
How many times did the Packers pick off Ponder? Twice I think, that's 14 points right there. Yup, 14 points in under 2 minutes and 15 seconds.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
It should be noted though that the Viking's defense played the Packer's offense twice while the Packer's defense got to play Christian Ponder once...that probably skews things by at least a dozen points, right?

The Vikings defense allowed an average of 19.8 points in the 14 games not playing the Packers, while Green Bay's defense gave up 22.5 points in the 15 games not played against Ponder.
 

bigbubbatd

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
1,679
Reaction score
166
Right. They are not better in anything. Yet. But remember, they had a new coach, new DC, new OC, 8 new starters on defense. Rookie QB. Banged up TE, Banged up OL. Missing their best player. Well they did beat the Packers in QB rating in the Red Zone. ;)

The Packers and Vikings shouldn't even be close on defense. Yet they are. What was the points per game given up?

So they had some injuries. Their banged up TE is always banged up (and has only had one good season), their banged up Oline has been bad at pass blocking even when healthy. The offense even when healthy screams middle of the road. Their number one receiver would be number 3 on two of the 3 teams in the division. Their oline even when healthy is poor at pass blocking - and they have a bad LT, nor RG, an aging RT, and not much depth. I think Bridgewater will be good but it just isnt a special offense. On to the defense

I am not saying their defense isnt good I am simply saying that when you look at the stats they actually look very similar to the Packers. There are few if any stats where they were actually substantially better than the Packers and I think most here would say the Packers defense was not a strength at all. You could probably say the Packer's defense's stats are even worse than they should be because they were on the field for more plays than all but 5 teams even a middle of the pack 3rd down defense. The Packer's offense scored quickly and often putting the defense on the field more and due to our awful special. Opposing teams had the 3rd best starting field position against the Packers which is crazy when you think of how few turnovers the Packers have. An average special teams would have bumped the Packers numbers even more.

This site does a great job breaking down how similar the Packers and Vikings defenses were last year.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/drivestatsdef2014

Middle of the road or worse pretty much the whole way. That is why I struggle to consider Minnesota's defense one that is close to being elite. They have young players who could get better but I see them being a ways away from being a game changing defense.
 

Curly Calhoun

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 23, 2015
Messages
2,123
Reaction score
575
Last year the Lions were everyone's **** pick, and it looked good for awhile. Once the weather turned cold and they had to play the Packers and the Cowboys in their two most important games, it was the same old Lions again. Close, but ultimately not quite good enough.

This year the **** pick seems to be the Vikings, and there are a lot of good reasons why. The thing is, though, is that Green Bay still has the best QB in the division, and in today's NFL, that's the most important factor. If Green Bay keeps #12 healthy and upright all season, I like them to win the North. That may not be ****, but I think it makes the most sense.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
So they had some injuries. Their banged up TE is always banged up (and has only had one good season), their banged up Oline has been bad at pass blocking even when healthy. The offense even when healthy screams middle of the road. Their number one receiver would be number 3 on two of the 3 teams in the division. Their oline even when healthy is poor at pass blocking - and they have a bad LT, nor RG, an aging RT, and not much depth. I think Bridgewater will be good but it just isnt a special offense. On to the defense

I am not saying their defense isnt good I am simply saying that when you look at the stats they actually look very similar to the Packers. There are few if any stats where they were actually substantially better than the Packers and I think most here would say the Packers defense was not a strength at all. You could probably say the Packer's defense's stats are even worse than they should be because they were on the field for more plays than all but 5 teams even a middle of the pack 3rd down defense. The Packer's offense scored quickly and often putting the defense on the field more and due to our awful special. Opposing teams had the 3rd best starting field position against the Packers which is crazy when you think of how few turnovers the Packers have. An average special teams would have bumped the Packers numbers even more.

This site does a great job breaking down how similar the Packers and Vikings defenses were last year.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/drivestatsdef2014

Middle of the road or worse pretty much the whole way. That is why I struggle to consider Minnesota's defense one that is close to being elite. They have young players who could get better but I see them being a ways away from being a game changing defense.

Mostly agree with your take on the Vikings.

While it seems the Packers offense is scoring at a quick pace they actually ranked fifth in both plays and time of possession per drive because ranking first in punts in second in three and outs.

The main reason the Packers defense had to play a ton of snaps is because they weren't able to get off the field, ranking 26th in three and outs and 27th in punts forced.
 

bigbubbatd

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
1,679
Reaction score
166
Mostly agree with your take on the Vikings.

While it seems the Packers offense is scoring at a quick pace they actually ranked fifth in both plays and time of possession per drive because ranking first in punts in second in three and outs.

The main reason the Packers defense had to play a ton of snaps is because they weren't able to get off the field, ranking 26th in three and outs and 27th in punts forced.

Great points. I should have look at the offense stats a little more. The Packers defense was odd in that it had a decent 3rd down rate but were really bad at getting off the field. I am not sure if you can find it but did those numbers change when Clay went back to middle linebacker?

My main point is not how the Packer's defense will be elite but how the Viking's defense struggle as much or more than the Packers in most areas (including getting off the field) yet people are talking like their defense is on the verge of being special. It is always hard to compare a 4-3 to a 3-4 position by position but on overall stats the defenses were strikingly similar.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Great points. I should have look at the offense stats a little more. The Packers defense was odd in that it had a decent 3rd down rate but were really bad at getting off the field. I am not sure if you can find it but did those numbers change when Clay went back to middle linebacker?

The Packers finished the regular season ranked 18th in opponent´s third down conversions at 40.8%. Before the team moved Matthews to ILB they were ranked 31st in the league (48.1%), after the bye week the defense had the fifth best conversion rate in the NFL (33.3%). I have mentioned it before that while moving Clay inside was a huge improvement for the unit fans have to realize the Packers faced five rushing attacks ranked 24th or worse in the second half of the season.

I took the numbers from Pro Football Reference´s play index, which may slighty differ from some other websites.

My main point is not how the Packer's defense will be elite but how the Viking's defense struggle as much or more than the Packers in most areas (including getting off the field) yet people are talking like their defense is on the verge of being special. It is always hard to compare a 4-3 to a 3-4 position by position but on overall stats the defenses were strikingly similar.

Absolutely agree with you on that.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,815
Reaction score
936
I think people are high on the Viking's defense because the Vikings appear to have some pretty good, improving players on that defense. Somehow Anthony Barr fell to them in the draft last season and he played like the top-10 pick he should have been. They have one of the better young safeties in the NFL in Harrison Smith, a very good young corner in Rhodes, another good, young linebacker in Hodges, one very good dlineman in Griffen and Floyd looks as though he should also turn into a great dlineman.

Now, there's a lot of projection going on with the improvements that should occur with the Viking's defense but there are fewer questions for them than there are for the Packer's defense.
 
Top