Fire Capers

[Deleted member 6794]

Round and round is right, and in each situation, they are all unique. Seattle was paying a quality QB 3rd round rookie money. We'll see what happens to all their FA money going forward. They were very fortunate. I'd venture a guess that if Rodgers was making 3rd round rookie money for a few years, we'd have seen a few more FA's

The Patriots have been the exception to almost everything over the years lately. They're good, I can't explain it, I also don't expect it to work very often as they are the exception, not the rule.

Denver? They still have won nothing, are 1 game better than us in record. Let's see where they are at the end of the year and they have a lot of FA's, important FA's coming up next year. I'm guessing they don't have a QB either. IMO, they are all in for this year and if they don't get it, then what?

All unique situations and different than GB.

The Packers have a ton of important free agents coming up over the next two offseasons as well and both the Patriots and the Broncos have less money committed toward the cap in 2017 than the Packers as of now. It doesn´t matter if teams hold on to their own players or sign free agents overpaying for underperforming player will come back to haunt a franchise.

 

[Mondio]

The Packers have a ton of important free agents coming up over the next two offseasons as well and both the Patriots and the Broncos have less money committed toward the cap in 2017 than the Packers as of now. It doesn´t matter if teams hold on to their own players or sign free agents overpaying for underperforming player will come back to haunt a franchise.

I know we do, but we aren't going to be without a QB next year and I"m not convinced their qb can put it together for a playoff run anyway, I think ours can. The patriots are good, what do you want me to say? How many teams have done what they do? GB is about the closest over time, so there's that. anyway

We'll just have to wait and see.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The patriots are good, what do you want me to say? How many teams have done what they do? GB is about the closest over time, so there's that. anyway

I would like to make you see that selectively using free agency or trades to upgrade positions of need isn´t a terrible thing to do.

 

[PackerDNA]

Round and round is right, and in each situation, they are all unique. Seattle was paying a quality QB 3rd round rookie money. We'll see what happens to all their FA money going forward. They were very fortunate. I'd venture a guess that if Rodgers was making 3rd round rookie money for a few years, we'd have seen a few more FA's

The Patriots have been the exception to almost everything over the years lately. They're good, I can't explain it, I also don't expect it to work very often as they are the exception, not the rule.

Denver? They still have won nothing, are 1 game better than us in record. Let's see where they are at the end of the year and they have a lot of FA's, important FA's coming up next year. I'm guessing they don't have a QB either. IMO, they are all in for this year and if they don't get it, then what?

All unique situations and different than GB.

And all teams with more success the last few years, and who go about things differently than TT.
Seattle has locked up all their top players; FA won't be as big a thing for them moving forward.
And TT has had the need and the opportunity , and the resources to participate in FA in recent years, and has not done so.
My point with Collins is, has much as I like him, he'd be what, 34 or 35 now? Heh, maybe he'd be another guy people would be saying to 'get that bum outta there'.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

My point with Collins is, has much as I like him, he'd be what, 34 or 35 now? Heh, maybe he'd be another guy people would be saying to 'get that bum outta there'.

Collins would be 32 by now and I´m quite sure would still be a major upgrade over any of our current safeties.

 

[Mondio]

I would like to make you see that selectively using free agency or trades to upgrade positions of need isn´t a terrible thing to do.

It's not if it works, and a lot of the names that get tossed around here haven't worked for the prospective teams over the years

We're 6-2, were a play away from the super bowl last year and would have been playing a team we dominated earlier in the year, I guess it's impossible to draft and develop a pretty good team

 

[PackerDNA]

Take the next step. Be bold, dare to be great.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

It's not if it works, and a lot of the names that get tossed around here haven't worked for the prospective teams over the years

We're 6-2, were a play away from the super bowl last year and would have been playing a team we dominated earlier in the year, I guess it's impossible to draft and develop a pretty good team

And Julius Peppers, a free agent signing, was a major reason the Packers nearly made it to the Super Bowl last year.

Draft and develop is absolutely the best way to build a strong nucleus on both sides of the ball, free agency or trades should be used to upgrade obvious shortcomings on the roster.

 

[Mondio]

And all teams with more success the last few years, and who go about things differently than TT.
Seattle has locked up all their top players; FA won't be as big a thing for them moving forward.
And TT has had the need and the opportunity , and the resources to participate in FA in recent years, and has not done so.
My point with Collins is, has much as I like him, he'd be what, 34 or 35 now? Heh, maybe he'd be another guy people would be saying to 'get that bum outta there'.

Who are "all these teams"? Pretty sure GB is one of the most successful teams over the past couple decades, past decade and past 5 or so years. They were almost the most successful last year. Who are "all these teams"? The Patriots? That's 1. Seattle has had our number, I don't think they're better and they were in a unique situation, we'll see going forward.

and my point with Collins is, he'd still be better than what we have. I don't even think he had hit his prime and we certainly wouldn't have had to spend so many roster spots trying to upgrade a position when we had an all pro, that was drafted and developed. Like I said, things don't happen in a vacuum, and losing Collins hurt all over this defense for years after. I could stay they still are. and losing a guy like that, hurts in other ways because roster turnover doesn't stop because you lost an all pro. Aging players don't stay forever young because you lost an all pro player. There is still replacement that needs to happen and now you're trying to replace 1 guy with 3 or 4 and still have all that other replacement to fill. But hey, FA would have fixed that

 

[Mondio]

And Julius Peppers, a free agent signing, was a major reason the Packers nearly made it to the Super Bowl last year.

Draft and develop is absolutely the best way to build a strong nucleus on both sides of the ball, free agency or trades should be used to upgrade obvious shortcomings on the roster.

and if we signed Jarius Byrd, would that have happened?

 

[Mondio]

and who's the FA we needed to sign this year? Who would be putting us over the top with an intact OL that was above average last year and fairly solid, and are complete crap this year? Who was going to fix that besides the OL just playing better like they can? SHould we have gotten a high priced FA WR to take Jordy's spot? our receivers were looking poised to break records this year, what happened? We didn't sign a FA? ILB's? all the big names are lighting it up for their respective teams and the 2nd tier guys are as forgettable as the 2nd tier guys we have, too bad we missed out on Suh too.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Who are "all these teams"? Pretty sure GB is one of the most successful teams over the past couple decades, past decade and past 5 or so years. They were almost the most successful last year. Who are "all these teams"? The Patriots? That's 1. Seattle has had our number, I don't think they're better and they were in a unique situation, we'll see going forward.

The Packers have had HOF QBs starting for them for the last 24 years and have won two Super Bowls. If Rodgers ends up not winning another one I would consider it as a major disappointment.

and if we signed Jarius Byrd, would that have happened?

Byrd was by far the best free agent safety available for a long time and would have been a perfect fit for the Packers biggest need during last year´s offseason. There´s no reason to bring him his injury in New Orleans as a reason signing him wouldn´t have worked out with the Packers.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

and who's the FA we needed to sign this year? Who would be putting us over the top with an intact OL that was above average last year and fairly solid, and are complete crap this year? Who was going to fix that besides the OL just playing better like they can? SHould we have gotten a high priced FA WR to take Jordy's spot? our receivers were looking poised to break records this year, what happened? We didn't sign a FA? ILB's? all the big names are lighting it up for their respective teams and the 2nd tier guys are as forgettable as the 2nd tier guys we have, too bad we missed out on Suh too.

No reason to get defensive with ridiculous claims nobody ever talked about.

 

[Mondio]

The Packers have had HOF QBs starting for them for the last 24 years and have won two Super Bowls. If Rodgers ends up not winning another one I would consider it as a major disappointment.



Byrd was by far the best free agent safety available for a long time and would have been a perfect fit for the Packers biggest need during last year´s offseason. There´s no reason to bring him his injury in New Orleans as a reason signing him wouldn´t have worked out with the Packers.

why not? Everyone wanted him? He was a great FA and we all wanted him. How did that work out for his team, and why couldn't have that been us? He got injured in practice, it could have so easily been us. We could easily have been sitting with no answer at Safety and no help at OLB either. but I guess in the land of hypotheticals, even very realistic ones aren't valid when they don't conform to the agenda I guess.

 

[PackerDNA]

Who are "all these teams"? Pretty sure GB is one of the most successful teams over the past couple decades, past decade and past 5 or so years. They were almost the most successful last year. Who are "all these teams"? The Patriots? That's 1. Seattle has had our number, I don't think they're better and they were in a unique situation, we'll see going forward.

and my point with Collins is, he'd still be better than what we have. I don't even think he had hit his prime and we certainly wouldn't have had to spend so many roster spots trying to upgrade a position when we had an all pro, that was drafted and developed. Like I said, things don't happen in a vacuum, and losing Collins hurt all over this defense for years after. I could stay they still are. and losing a guy like that, hurts in other ways because roster turnover doesn't stop because you lost an all pro. Aging players don't stay forever young because you lost an all pro player. There is still replacement that needs to happen and now you're trying to replace 1 guy with 3 or 4 and still have all that other replacement to fill. But hey, FA would have fixed that

All these teams being who I pointed out in the post. Over the last few seasons, Denver and Seattle have been at or near the top; more than Green Bay. Same for New England, albeit for a much longer time.
The point is- and the wall we can't seem to get over- is that trades and free agency are important options that can be used effectively. The most successful teams in the league use them; the Packers do not.
I don't feel like comparing our team to most of the league, which frankly sucks. At the end of the day, it's about winning Super Bowls. The recent and currently best teams use trades and free agency. The Packers do not.

 

[Mondio]

No reason to get defensive with ridiculous claims nobody ever talked about.

oh my, I asked who? everyone says we need it, so tell me who would make our Oline perform like last year? Because if they are, i'm confident our team is doing just fine, even better than the 6-2 we currently are and fans aren't feeling anything like they are now.

I guess Brandon Spikes was our answer? and yes I do find that ridiculous, but then again, I never thought he was a legitimate FA

 

[Mondio]

All these teams being who I pointed out in the post. Over the last few seasons, Denver and Seattle have been at or near the top; more than Green Bay. Same for New England, albeit for a much longer time.
The point is- and the wall we can't seem to get over- is that trades and free agency are important options that can be used effectively. The most successful teams in the league use them; the Packers do not.
I don't feel like comparing our team to most of the league, which frankly sucks. At the end of the day, it's about winning Super Bowls. The recent and currently best teams use trades and free agency. The Packers do not.

what has Denver done that we haven't? they beat us 2 weeks ago, we'll see where they are at the end. You think Seattle was better than us last year? 1 play and we're in the super bowl and they might not even make the playoffs this year. and they were still paying peanuts to a quality QB. so 1 team out of 32, the exception to all the rules, you're right, the Packers are horsehocky

 

[TJV]

A couple of points: My biggest complaint about Thompson is the conflict between a draft and develop philosophy which continually fields one of the youngest rosters in the league and Capers' defense which requires experienced veterans to execute it properly. It's up to McCarthy to replace Capers and it's up to Thompson to adjust if he doesn't.

IMO the earliest Capers will be fired is after this season. I just can't see McCarthy doing that in-season. And even if it happens in the off season, it's likely - again just my opinion - McCarthy will promote someone on the staff to be DC.

The Patriots have been the exception to almost everything over the years lately. They're good, I can't explain it, I also don't expect it to work very often as they are the exception, not the rule.

Here's the explanation: B e l i c h i c k

 

[PackerDNA]

and if we signed Jarius Byrd, would that have happened?

Mondio, IMO, you're missing the point, and it's because you're cherry picking too much.
I posted about the Joe Johnson signing a few days back. To me, for the Saints, Byrd was the same type of signing; a high level player to step right in and perform at a position of need. signed.Like Johnson, there was evidence to support that belief/decision, and no way of knowing that he would be a bust-Byrd due to injury, Johnson being done when he signed.
Because FA signings fail elsewhere is no reason for this team to swear it off entirely.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

why not? Everyone wanted him? He was a great FA and we all wanted him. How did that work out for his team, and why couldn't have that been us? He got injured in practice, it could have so easily been us. We could easily have been sitting with no answer at Safety and no help at OLB either. but I guess in the land of hypotheticals, even very realistic ones aren't valid when they don't conform to the agenda I guess.

So you don´t like Thompson´s decision to re-sign Jordy Nelson because he tore his ACL this offseason as TT should have known that Jordy will get injured??? Injuries happen all around the league but there was no way the Saints or any team could have predicted Byrd to get injured some games into his first season with the team.

I guess Brandon Spikes was our answer? and yes I do find that ridiculous, but then again, I never thought he was a legitimate FA

Spikes was most likely the best inside linebacker available in free agency this offseason but it seems he had a ton of issues off the field. Thompson has passed on addressing the position for several years now though which is hurting the defense.

what has Denver done that we haven't? they beat us 2 weeks ago, we'll see where they are at the end. You think Seattle was better than us last year? 1 play and we're in the super bowl and they might not even make the playoffs this year. and they were still paying peanuts to a quality QB. so 1 team out of 32, the exception to all the rules, you're right, the Packers are horsehocky

Well, Denver made it to the Super Bowl two years ago with the Seahawks winning it. So if you like it or not those teams have been more succesful than the Packers.

 

[PackerDNA]

what has Denver done that we haven't? they beat us 2 weeks ago, we'll see where they are at the end. You think Seattle was better than us last year? 1 play and we're in the super bowl and they might not even make the playoffs this year. and they were still paying peanuts to a quality QB. so 1 team out of 32, the exception to all the rules, you're right, the Packers are horsehocky

*Sigh* I give up.
Denver has been to a Super Bowl more recently, and is in better position now to return than us .
YES, Seattle was better; they won with the game on the line, we choked. They LOST!!! Seattle has been to the last 2 Super Bowls, winning one. For 5 years and counting, this team talks about it. The 5 minutes and one play away stuff, in the end, is nothing more than 'losers lament'.
You still keep waiting to see how things turn out and then jump on selected examples to make your point.
Where did I say the Packers are
horse hockey'? Come on, man.

 

[DMANDTM]

Collins would be 32 by now and I´m quite sure would still be a major upgrade over any of our current safeties

I would be happy with having Charles Woodson still also. Dix would be a lot better if he had time to develop and learn behind a veteran like him.

 

[Mondio]

Mondio, IMO, you're missing the point, and it's because you're cherry picking too much.
I posted about the Joe Johnson signing a few days back. To me, for the Saints, Byrd was the same type of signing; a high level player to step right in and perform at a position of need. signed.Like Johnson, there was evidence to support that belief/decision, and no way of knowing that he would be a bust-Byrd due to injury, Johnson being done when he signed.
Because FA signings fail elsewhere is no reason for this team to swear it off entirely.

I didn't miss any point, bolding doesn't make your point more valid. Someone said we almost made the super bowl because we signed peppers, I asked how that would have worked if we signed Byrd, a guy everyone wanted. You're right, injuries happen, kind of my point, speaking of missing it.

everyone thinks these things happen in a vacuum, they don't. and Byrd had surgery in May the year he was a FA and he was hurt in practice, not a hit in a game, practice, so it could have easily have been us with no safety, a high salary and no OLB

MY point, our team is very good, and has been for a long time. Denver got their ***** handed to them in a super bowl, GB committed the biggest choke job in football history 1 game away from it, you're right, Denver has totally been way more successful LOL

anyway,

have fun. I still maintain that if our offensive line play returns to adequate like they have show previously and has inexplicably fallen far from that standard to the point they can't even block a normal front let alone pick up a blitz, we're as good as anyone. But you all are completely correct, that a FA signing would fix that. Enjoy

 

[PackerDNA]

I didn't miss any point, bolding doesn't make your point more valid. Someone said we almost made the super bowl because we signed peppers, I asked how that would have worked if we signed Byrd, a guy everyone wanted. You're right, injuries happen, kind of my point, speaking of missing it.

everyone thinks these things happen in a vacuum, they don't. and Byrd had surgery in May the year he was a FA and he was hurt in practice, not a hit in a game, practice, so it could have easily have been us with no safety, a high salary and no OLB

MY point, our team is very good, and has been for a long time. Denver got their ***** handed to them in a super bowl, GB committed the biggest choke job in football history 1 game away from it, you're right, Denver has totally been way more successful LOL

anyway,

have fun. I still maintain that if our offensive line play returns to adequate like they have show previously and has inexplicably fallen far from that standard to the point they can't even block a normal front let alone pick up a blitz, we're as good as anyone. But you all are completely correct, that a FA signing would fix that. Enjoy

We'll agree to disagree , my friend.

 

[Croak]

I don't think they should fire Coach Capers during mid season. But I think they should consider new options when the off season rolls around. The past 4 years have not been good for the defense and it may well be a combination of things. But ultimately, I think he might have a decent scheme in mind, but he either doesn't know how to communicate it well, or implement it well with the players he has. If the second is the case, then a wise coach would tailor his scheme to the players he has. He wouldn't try to fit square pegs in round holes. Coach McCarthy only fired Slocum after a terrible incident in an important game. He took too long. Many thought Slocum should have been gone long before that. Is that what is going to happen with Capers? Wait until his defense royally blows it in a most important game? I think Coach McCarthy shows extraordinary patience with his staff. Sometimes, I wonder if he tolerates too much and is afraid to lower the boom. I can't imagine Vince tolerating a defensive four year failure.