De’Vondre Campbell

[Pokerbrat2000]

His shoulder injury is the sole reason if Rodgers is leaving I may hold tight on no extension and pay him the massive increased hit he has this year $13M....see how well he is doing and extend him even in season if good to go.

Seems like every time "we" chat about what the Packers are going to do or at least try to do, it usually involves what Rodgers is doing in 2022. Resigning our own, signing FA's and to some extent the draft is heavily reliant on what happens with Rodgers. Not just from what his talent does or doesn't do for the team, but what his being traded or restructured does for the Cap. Historians conversations center around 2 time periods BC and AC.....I think the same is going to be said about the Packers decisions and whether they are coming BR or AR.

 

[Voyageur]

The Packers should have found a way to fit an extension into Campbell's contract to keep him on board for the next couple of years. A day late, a dollar short, now millions they won't be able to pony up.

They obviously knew what they had after two or three games with him on the field. He hit the ground running and never stopped.

 

[swhitset]

I'm not paying ANY WR that type of money. That type of money better be a QB, high level OT or a shut down CB only.

I’m not sure I’d even go that far…. Beyond QB…. That seems insane to me.

 

[tynimiller]

The Packers should have found a way to fit an extension into Campbell's contract to keep him on board for the next couple of years. A day late, a dollar short, now millions they won't be able to pony up.

They obviously knew what they had after two or three games with him on the field. He hit the ground running and never stopped.

What are you talking about? I'm grossly not following your direction here...the team couldn't really fiscally begin to make decisions for 2022 such as this before the biggest chip falls one way or another because very well that chip will to an extent grossly control some decisions and impact fiscal spending of course.

You also are talking about a player that had ONE massive season....is nearly 30....at a position of a LOT of impacts. That isn't a player profile you go gangbusters on after two or three games...let alone one season.

 

[tynimiller]

I’m not sure I’d even go that far…. Beyond QB…. That seems insane to me.

I outlined the only time I'd consider the other spots. Have to be a tag situation for one year and zero plan forward beyond one year push for a SB.

 

[tynimiller]

Seems like every time "we" chat about what the Packers are going to do or at least try to do, it usually involves what Rodgers is doing in 2022. Resigning our own, signing FA's and to some extent the draft is heavily reliant on what happens with Rodgers. Not just from what his talent does or doesn't do for the team, but what his being traded or restructured does for the Cap. Historians conversations center around 2 time periods BC and AC.....I think the same is going to be said about the Packers decisions and whether they are coming BR or AR.

Rodgers chip falling is going to start a massive amount of others to follow suit...we are talking from BIG to what some would say is tiny...just a few things that cannot or won't occur till after:

-Adams tagging or not of course biggest

then a ton of others:

TONS of players we have to decide to restructure, cut or extend:

-Jaire
-Preston
-Turner
-Amos
-Cobb
-Crosby
-Lewis
-Lowry
-Whitney

TONS of FA decisions or attempts to bring back:

-Rasul
-De'Vondre
-Tonyan
-Patrick
-Yosh
-MVS
-Lazard (what tender to use)
-Sullivan and King
-Bojo


I'd argue not a single one of these other decisions can be cemented in stone until you know if Rodgers is back...now something we all wouldn't be privy to is if Rodgers said I'll come back if "insert list" can play here as well....well that in turn could lead to a TON of Russ Ball answering questions and seeing if fiscal gymnastics can make it work which could lead to preliminary discussions with any of the list above if they'd play under "insert restructure" or do "insert item into contract"....

Many just want to ignore all this and live in vacuums like with Campbell as example...they just want to say "He was amazing, GB is ignorant fools if they let him not come back..." It isn't even close to that simple.

 

[tynimiller]

Rodgers chip falling is going to start a massive amount of others to follow suit...we are talking from BIG to what some would say is tiny...just a few things that cannot or won't occur till after:

-Adams tagging or not of course biggest

then a ton of others:

TONS of players we have to decide to restructure, cut or extend:

-Jaire
-Preston
-Turner
-Amos
-Cobb
-Crosby
-Lewis
-Lowry
-Whitney

TONS of FA decisions or attempts to bring back:

-Rasul
-De'Vondre
-Tonyan
-Patrick
-Yosh
-MVS
-Lazard (what tender to use)
-Sullivan and King
-Bojo


I'd argue not a single one of these other decisions can be cemented in stone until you know if Rodgers is back...now something we all wouldn't be privy to is if Rodgers said I'll come back if "insert list" can play here as well....well that in turn could lead to a TON of Russ Ball answering questions and seeing if fiscal gymnastics can make it work which could lead to preliminary discussions with any of the list above if they'd play under "insert restructure" or do "insert item into contract"....

Many just want to ignore all this and live in vacuums like with Campbell as example...they just want to say "He was amazing, GB is ignorant fools if they let him not come back..." It isn't even close to that simple.

AND this doesn't even touch the massive draft board shifting it could cause with priorities or need levels rising or falling for what might be everyday basis from the announcement till the first day of the draft depending on his decision and the like twenty others that follow. Vastly more than a normal off season...and this draft nerd both loves it and hates it...I've admittedly focused a TON of my research and scouting primarily on WR, OLB, DL and OL because I feel regardless of ANYTHING we do those are spots this team could and will have a need for future and present impact possibly just depends to what degree.

 

[Pkrjones]

Not touching your long list of players scenarios... but the only reason GB was trying to extend De'Vondre this early was to help spread-out the $808K dead money into the rest of the new contract. Guessing they weren't close in numbers so GB decided to take the hit & let the league set Campbell's value. Sad to see him go, but a draftee will have to fill his shoes (hoping for Chenal or Sanborn from WI... but neither will help in coverage, much).

 

[Voyageur]

What are you talking about? I'm grossly not following your direction here...the team couldn't really fiscally begin to make decisions for 2022 such as this before the biggest chip falls one way or another because very well that chip will to an extent grossly control some decisions and impact fiscal spending of course.

You also are talking about a player that had ONE massive season....is nearly 30....at a position of a LOT of impacts. That isn't a player profile you go gangbusters on after two or three games...let alone one season.

What I'm talking about is insuring that the defense remained viable, even if we lost both Adams and Rodgers. That's common sense. The dollar figure, early on, could have been just a percentage of what it would take now to get him back.

The entire future of the team isn't based just on Rodgers and/or Adams. They will be playing the next season with or without them, and you need the best defenders you can put on the field.

You don't see that? Seriously?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Not touching your long list of players scenarios... but the only reason GB was trying to extend De'Vondre this early was to help spread-out the $808K dead money into the rest of the new contract. Guessing they weren't close in numbers so GB decided to take the hit & let the league set Campbell's value. Sad to see him go, but a draftee will have to fill his shoes (hoping for Chenal or Sanborn from WI... but neither will help in coverage, much).

I imagine he left, knowing the offer is still on the table. I doubt many guys want to resign, until they know what others will be offering. While I don't like the big money involved, I sure don't blame a guy for waiting to see if someone else offers him $500K-5 million more than his 2021 team.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I look at the Packers situation in a very simplified way:

A. Rodgers stays with a reworked contract.

B. Rodgers is traded.

C. Rodgers retires.

If A happens, the Packers are pretty much saying "we are all in" and will do whatever they can to push money out and retain as many players as they can. While also trying to rework players like Bahk, Clark and Amos's current contract.

If scenarios B or C happen. I say its rebuild time. No sense signing big 1-2 year contracts for players that won't be around if the Packers find their replacement QB by 2023 or later. Trade off the big names while you can and accumulate as many high draft pics as possible.

 

[Voyageur]

Regardless of how people want to view the situation, the Packers will use what they can to insure their defense is solid next year. They have to, or it won't make a damned bit of difference if Rodgers and/or Adams are back. It would be outright stupid to let the best players they have on that side of the ball go, to insure they keep two offensive weapons.

Rest assured, as much as Rodgers and Adams are in the picture, maintaining the defense is as great of importance. Especially since they still don't even have a clue as to whether Rodgers will be back, or how long he'll stay.

Keeping Adams would be gravy. As much as we want him there, money talks.

Defense keeps you in games, and the Packer staff knows it. With a solid defense, and a good caretaker QB, and receivers, you can be competitive, although not necessarily championship caliber.

 

[tynimiller]

What I'm talking about is insuring that the defense remained viable, even if we lost both Adams and Rodgers. That's common sense. The dollar figure, early on, could have been just a percentage of what it would take now to get him back.

The entire future of the team isn't based just on Rodgers and/or Adams. They will be playing the next season with or without them, and you need the best defenders you can put on the field.

You don't see that? Seriously?

LOL....yes I don't think we will be part of the NFL if Rodgers and Adams doesn't come back LMAO

 

[tynimiller]

Not touching your long list of players scenarios... but the only reason GB was trying to extend De'Vondre this early was to help spread-out the $808K dead money into the rest of the new contract. Guessing they weren't close in numbers so GB decided to take the hit & let the league set Campbell's value. Sad to see him go, but a draftee will have to fill his shoes (hoping for Chenal or Sanborn from WI... but neither will help in coverage, much).

If in a vacuum of options you say I have to have one or the other Chenal is the better upside to grow in coverage ability. Agree, neither is ideal for a swing at replacing DeVondre however.

 

[Voyageur]

If in a vacuum of options you say I have to have one or the other Chenal is the better upside to grow in coverage ability. Agree, neither is ideal for a swing at replacing DeVondre however.

Neither will be drafted by the Packers, rest assured. There will be other needs that they will try to address. Anyhow, a guy drafted this time around means very little to this coming season. He's going to be learning the job.

 

[tynimiller]

Neither will be drafted by the Packers, rest assured. There will be other needs that they will try to address. Anyhow, a guy drafted this time around means very little to this coming season. He's going to be learning the job.

Stating such a definitive thing on an unknown is sheer ignorance. Keep living in your world man.

 

[Voyageur]

Stating such a definitive thing on an unknown is sheer ignorance. Keep living in your world man.

Sheer ignorance is acting like you know all the answers, and getting testy when you think someone just might disagree with you. That's on you, man.

For openers, rookies aren't usually top producers their first year. It takes a year to learn the game, and how they fit into the team's concepts.

Next, Chenal is the 4th ranked linebacker. Personally, I think he may be as good as Micah Parsons was, coming into the league, and could be listed as the best. His grade this past year was phenomenal against the run, and he can get to the passer when asked. Also, has that sideline to sideline skill the Packers need. He's projected as an early to middle 2nd round pick, not in the first. Would I take him late in the first if I was the Packers? It depends on who's out there at WR. If there's a can't miss pass catcher, I gotta go with him.

That said, I wouldn't be at all displeased if the Packers traded up to the middle of round 2 to get Chenal if he's still available. My personal belief is that he has a lot of the same attributes as the Watts brothers. Leo plays the game from sideline to sideline, and has an enormous downhill game in the pass rush. He could simply be the #1 sleeper in the draft. The question is, are you willing to bet on him, going early?

But, the facts are that the Wisconsin linebackers are a valuable commodity coming out. Even guys who played sparingly, not actually starters, are making it in the NFL. Wisconsin - in my opinion - is Linebacker and Running Back University. They keep churning them out, and they're damned good. Leo could be one of the better ones.

Now, why do I see a WR early in the draft for the Packers? Need. Right now, the Packers have Adams, and he may well be gone. You need to come up with someone who can hang onto the ball, and runs patterns properly. Adams does, the rest? Iffy-iffy! Some try to catch the ball like they're wearing boxing gloves.

Two WRs I like are Drake London and Garrett Wilson. I believe London could be a play maker immediately, and Wilson by mid-season.

So, anyway, my comments weren't just off the cuff, they were based on observations, watching clips on various players, and trying not to get to personally attached to any players, other than the skills I see translated into the NFL.

Of course, all this could change, by the time the combine ends, as I know you'd agree.

 

[tynimiller]

Sheer ignorance is acting like you know all the answers, and getting testy when you think someone just might disagree with you. That's on you, man.

For openers, rookies aren't usually top producers their first year. It takes a year to learn the game, and how they fit into the team's concepts.

Next, Chenal is the 4th ranked linebacker. Personally, I think he may be as good as Micah Parsons was, coming into the league, and could be listed as the best. His grade this past year was phenomenal against the run, and he can get to the passer when asked. Also, has that sideline to sideline skill the Packers need. He's projected as an early to middle 2nd round pick, not in the first. Would I take him late in the first if I was the Packers? It depends on who's out there at WR. If there's a can't miss pass catcher, I gotta go with him.

That said, I wouldn't be at all displeased if the Packers traded up to the middle of round 2 to get Chenal if he's still available. My personal belief is that he has a lot of the same attributes as the Watts brothers. Leo plays the game from sideline to sideline, and has an enormous downhill game in the pass rush. He could simply be the #1 sleeper in the draft. The question is, are you willing to bet on him, going early?

But, the facts are that the Wisconsin linebackers are a valuable commodity coming out. Even guys who played sparingly, not actually starters, are making it in the NFL. Wisconsin - in my opinion - is Linebacker and Running Back University. They keep churning them out, and they're damned good. Leo could be one of the better ones.

Now, why do I see a WR early in the draft for the Packers? Need. Right now, the Packers have Adams, and he may well be gone. You need to come up with someone who can hang onto the ball, and runs patterns properly. Adams does, the rest? Iffy-iffy! Some try to catch the ball like they're wearing boxing gloves.

Two WRs I like are Drake London and Garrett Wilson. I believe London could be a play maker immediately, and Wilson by mid-season.

So, anyway, my comments weren't just off the cuff, they were based on observations, watching clips on various players, and trying not to get to personally attached to any players, other than the skills I see translated into the NFL.

Of course, all this could change, by the time the combine ends, as I know you'd agree.

LOL you are the one that declared they will not be drafted. It is ignorant to declare who a team will draft let alone declare who they won't.

Your second line wasn't even discussed and no one saying they're were going to be top producers...so why even go there?

Fourth ranked linebacker from who are you pulling your rankings from just curious....I don't disagree and have him firmly at 6th at worst. I've seen him as high as 4 and as low as 9/10. He is safely in the category of the label concensus top 10 linebacker for this draft...

But how are you going to declare definitively neither will be drafted by GB, a team that presently has a depth chart at ILB which is the most depleted both by number of players vs normal number carried and also experience (positions not inclusive of special teams). Even our depleted WR room has at least a normal number of guys we see on a 53 at five and vastly more in real game snaps than ILB; which presently has Summers, McDuffie and Wilborn as the only guys signed in 2022 presently. Unless they sign Campbell out of UFA and Barnes out of his ERFA there is a desperate need at worst the #2 ILB role in GB in 2022 if not even the #1 possibly.

 

[Voyageur]

LOL you are the one that declared they will not be drafted. It is ignorant to declare who a team will draft let alone declare who they won't.

Your second line wasn't even discussed and no one saying they're were going to be top producers...so why even go there?

Fourth ranked linebacker from who are you pulling your rankings from just curious....I don't disagree and have him firmly at 6th at worst. I've seen him as high as 4 and as low as 9/10. He is safely in the category of the label concensus top 10 linebacker for this draft...

But how are you going to declare definitively neither will be drafted by GB, a team that presently has a depth chart at ILB which is the most depleted both by number of players vs normal number carried and also experience (positions not inclusive of special teams). Even our depleted WR room has at least a normal number of guys we see on a 53 at five and vastly more in real game snaps than ILB; which presently has Summers, McDuffie and Wilborn as the only guys signed in 2022 presently. Unless they sign Campbell out of UFA and Barnes out of his ERFA there is a desperate need at worst the #2 ILB role in GB in 2022 if not even the #1 possibly.

Not once did I say they won't be drafted. That's pure BS. I said the Packers won't get them, and I still think that's the case. As for Campbell and Barnes, I think they will sign one of them.

Now, rant on if you like, or move along. I'm tired of discussing this with you when you don't even see there can be views other than your own.

 

[Pkrjones]

Barnes at $895K ERFA signing is a no-brainer IMHO. I would consider Chenal in the 3rd, but the need at WR (Olave, Burks) & DL (Legal, Winfrey) is greater. If both Smiths are gone OLB takes priority as well.

 

[Voyageur]

Barnes at $895K ERFA signing is a no-brainer IMHO. I would consider Chenal in the 3rd, but the need at WR (Olave, Burks) & DL (Legal, Winfrey) is greater. If both Smiths are gone OLB takes priority as well.

Also, Campbell is back in GB today, and his contract is voided tomorrow. Could be something working there.

 

[tynimiller]

Not once did I say they won't be drafted. That's pure BS. I said the Packers won't get them, and I still think that's the case. As for Campbell and Barnes, I think they will sign one of them.

Now, rant on if you like, or move along. I'm tired of discussing this with you when you don't even see there can be views other than your own.

Oh my God don't read my mistype of the opening but the fact we were discussing the Packers drafting either of them in a hypothetical vacuum and you swooped in with this exact claim below:

. There will be other needs that they will try to address. Anyhow, a guy drafted this time around means very little to this coming season. He's going to be learning the job.

Clearly by my full post above I meant drafted by the Packers. Take it how you want cuz clearly you will.....smh

 

[tynimiller]

Now, rant on if you like, or move along. I'm tired of discussing this with you when you don't even see there can be views other than your own.

This is rich...shoot often times I'm one of the few on this board acknowledging viewpoints and even fleshing out arguments of thoughts I don't personally hold. Clearly you haven't been around the forum long enough to realize this.

 

[Voyageur]

Barnes at $895K ERFA signing is a no-brainer IMHO. I would consider Chenal in the 3rd, but the need at WR (Olave, Burks) & DL (Legal, Winfrey) is greater. If both Smiths are gone OLB takes priority as well.

I wish I knew where Olave was going to go in this draft. He can stretch a field. He might be one of the few receivers who can come in as a rookie and make a splash. I just don't see him going later than about #20. If he's there when GB picks, it would be hard passing on him.

 

[Voyageur]

This is rich...shoot often times I'm one of the few on this board acknowledging viewpoints and even fleshing out arguments of thoughts I don't personally hold. Clearly you haven't been around the forum long enough to realize this.

That's what I usually see from you. I have no objection to it, and do it myself. Playing the devil's advocate can stir up interesting conversations. That's why I was caught totally off guard when you took a shot at me. If you thought I took one at you, rest assured, nothing like that was never intended. If it's a misunderstanding on either yours, mine, or both of our parts, we should bury it, and move on.

Personally, I've enjoyed the banter we've had on so many issues since I've been here.