Free Agents you would like to see sign with Green Bay in 2019?

[HardRightEdge]

Ok, yeah that makes sense. I did know that he reduces inside at times.

So my question is this-- why would Trey Flowers be the optimal fit while Za'Darius Smith wouldn't work?

You might have a point there. I could be wrong, but I see Flowers as a smart player who can learn new tricks. For instance, Pettine does like to drop his OLBs into the flat in zone. That's more about football smarts and play recognition than anything else. For instance, as it turns out, that's probably the best, most consistent thing Fackrell does. I could be wrong, but Smith strikes me as more a hound on the loose.

 

[Dantés]

You might have a point there. I could be wrong, but I see Flowers as a smart player who can learn new tricks. For instance, Pettine does like to drop his OLBs into the flat in zone. That's more about football smarts and play recognition than anything else. For instance, as it turns out, that's probably the best, most consistent thing Fackrell does. I could be wrong, but Smith strikes me as more a hound on the loose.

And that could be true. I just wonder if neither are really the ideal fit.

I think it's probably moot, as I don't expect Flowers to reach the market, and I think Smith could get overpaid by a pretty big margin.

 

[HardRightEdge]

And that could be true. I just wonder if neither are really the ideal fit.

I think it's probably moot, as I don't expect Flowers to reach the market, and I think Smith could get overpaid by a pretty big margin.

We seem to agree that "ideal fit" is in the context of availability, cost, age, projection. I'm pretty much on board with your Barrett choice as noted earler.

You're probably right with Flowers, though with Belichick you never know how he views the value proposition once his agent throws numbers at him. Z. Smith? Probably, with 32 teams there always seems to be somebody willing to pay a guy who didn't do all that much until his first contract year as though he was a steady Eddie or a guy who showed gradual progression. There's that risk the guy was playing for the contract then spends his time finding novel ways to expend his new found wealth instead of honing his craft.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I liked what I saw from Lancaster. Was doing some good things as a first year guy with a lot to learn. I like Pennel when he was here too, thought he was growing into a nice story, worked his way up. Consistent improvement etc. But then he missed half a season with suspensions to start and end it. One because of PED's. so just how much was that attributed to his improvement? At this point I'd rather go with someone else too. at the very least, Lancaster is a rotational guy, but i'd like to give him time to grow and someone else behind him a shot.

Lancaster was surprisingly good in limited action late last season. Pennel excelled in run defense in 2018, it might be smart to bring him back for a reasonable deal.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

A word about Brown, Beckham and Bell.

Even if they were affordable and represented the good long term value their deals will demand, which is not the case, there is another consideration.

Ask yourself the question, "why was McCarthy fired?" If one thinks it was just about friction with The Franchise or a stale offensive scheme, that would be a mistake.

The other factors are "lack of accountability". That's a euphemism that implies, among other things, lack of discipline and not buying into team concepts. How do those three players measure up in the "do your job" and "there is no "I" in team" calculation? Not well at all. Those expressions may be hackneyed cliches, but it is very hard to win without them.

I think talent tends to trump "team mentality" on the field though. I don't care how many Randall Cobbs the team has, the team with Suh, Talib, Marcus Peters, Brandin Cooks, etc. will tend to win verse the team with less talent.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think talent tends to trump "team mentality" on the field though. I don't care how many Randall Cobbs the team has, the team with Suh, Talib, Marcus Peters, Brandin Cooks, etc. will tend to win verse the team with less talent.

The team with Roethlisberger, Smith-Schuster, Brown and Conner tends to disagree with you.

 

[Mondio]

I think talent tends to trump "team mentality" on the field though. I don't care how many Randall Cobbs the team has, the team with Suh, Talib, Marcus Peters, Brandin Cooks, etc. will tend to win verse the team with less talent.

I'd take players like Cobb at their respective positions and healthy over Suh and Talib any day, and win. Your problem is you compare a player that hasn't played great recently because of injury to guys that were added to team loaded with talent. Suh didn't make that defense go, someone else did. why act like you can't get team players with talent? Maybe you missed Jordy, Driver, Jones, Jennings, Cobb, Adams over the years? does it really require what you're suggesting to win? I just have to point back at the Steelers to show it doesn't hold true. Better offense and better team and what did he bring to them?

 

[Sunshinepacker]

The team with Roethlisberger, Smith-Schuster, Brown and Conner tends to disagree with you.

Huh, they went 9-6-1 this year without having the best RB in the NFL. How exactly was that disappointing? 13-3 the year before. 11-5 before that. I'm failing to see the terrible season in here, perhaps you could point me in the right direction?

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I'd take players like Cobb at their respective positions and healthy over Suh and Talib any day, and win. Your problem is you compare a player that hasn't played great recently because of injury to guys that were added to team loaded with talent. Suh didn't make that defense go, someone else did. why act like you can't get team players with talent? Maybe you missed Jordy, Driver, Jones, Jennings, Cobb, Adams over the years? does it really require what you're suggesting to win? I just have to point back at the Steelers to show it doesn't hold true. Better offense and better team and what did he bring to them?

As I just pointed out, I can't seem to find this mythical "disappointing" season for the Steelers. They went 9-6-1 last year without the best RB in the NFL. Prior to that they've had pretty good seasons. And no, a bunch of Randall Cobbs would most assuredly NOT beat a team of Suhs and Talibs (if for no other reason than putting a bunch of Talibs on the field would scare any sane human from playing against them).

And at what point did I argue that talented guys can't be team-first? The Packers have had plenty. I was simply pointing out that excluding talented guys just because they're more publicly outgoing in expressing their feelings isn't a great idea. Great talents tend to win out in the NFL. Randy Moss is a great example of this. I know fans want the players on their favorite teams to be "humble" and "sacrifice for the team" but the reality is that those guys are few and far between, relying on finding enough of them is awfully tough in the NFL. Take attitude into account, but don't just fly off with "I DON'T WANT THAT PLAYER, HE'S TOO COCKY!"

Finally, I would imagine that many might disagree with you putting Jennings in this category.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Huh, they went 9-6-1 this year without having the best RB in the NFL. How exactly was that disappointing? 13-3 the year before. 11-5 before that. I'm failing to see the terrible season in here, perhaps you could point me in the right direction?

The Steelers missed the playoffs while Conner performed at a level close to Bell.

Great talents tend to win out in the NFL. Randy Moss is a great example of this.

Once again, how many rings has Randy Moss???

 

[HardRightEdge]

The team with Roethlisberger, Smith-Schuster, Brown and Conner tends to disagree with you.

The New England Patriots also had something to say about that.

 

[Half Empty]

As did enough other teams to keep them out of the playoffs.

 

[Mondio]

As I just pointed out, I can't seem to find this mythical "disappointing" season for the Steelers. They went 9-6-1 last year without the best RB in the NFL. Prior to that they've had pretty good seasons. And no, a bunch of Randall Cobbs would most assuredly NOT beat a team of Suhs and Talibs (if for no other reason than putting a bunch of Talibs on the field would scare any sane human from playing against them).

And at what point did I argue that talented guys can't be team-first? The Packers have had plenty. I was simply pointing out that excluding talented guys just because they're more publicly outgoing in expressing their feelings isn't a great idea. Great talents tend to win out in the NFL. Randy Moss is a great example of this. I know fans want the players on their favorite teams to be "humble" and "sacrifice for the team" but the reality is that those guys are few and far between, relying on finding enough of them is awfully tough in the NFL. Take attitude into account, but don't just fly off with "I DON'T WANT THAT PLAYER, HE'S TOO COCKY!"

Finally, I would imagine that many might disagree with you putting Jennings in this category.

I said players like Cobb at their respective positions. Jennings was nothing but a team player here. Randy Moss put up great stats, and again wore out his welcome on his 3rd team after 2 or 3 seasons, bad mouthing owners, coaches, upsetting the locker room and they sent him on his way. he won nothing more with NE than GB hasn't done without him.

This has nothing to do with being cocky, being cocky doesn't bother me a whole lot. i'd rather humble, but whatever. It's the selfishness and team tearing rather than team building that bothers me. I thought Randall was cocky and selfish. I think Jaire is cocky, but team oriented. Big difference. I know what Brown is, he's telegraphing it for everyone.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I think talent tends to trump "team mentality" on the field though. I don't care how many Randall Cobbs the team has, the team with Suh, Talib, Marcus Peters, Brandin Cooks, etc. will tend to win verse the team with less talent.

It might be worth noting, or maybe not, that the cap cost of those 4 players last season was $32.6 mil, thanks to a QB on a rookie contract.

Now, Suh is a FA, Cooks cap number jumps from $5.4 to $15.3 mil, Peters number jumps from $1.7 to $9.1 mil, and Talib's still on the books at $8 mil, down $11 mil, but a year older. Joyner, Saffold, Fowler and Easley are free agents. Their top 51 cap liabilities are about $3 mil more than the Packers and they don't even have 51 guys under contract, which does not leave all that much cap space.

They have a big question: "What happened to Gurley?" A minor injury that slowed his roll? Or is 3 successive 300+ touch seasons taking its toll?

They went all-in, now the window is starting to close with the QB contract on the near horizon.

You have to reckon they'll want to keep Saffold. After that, for the Rams to keep the ball rolling, they'll have to rely on small ball free agency and the draft.

There's nothing wrong with having a Randall Cobb per se among some 28 starters and key rotational guys. It is wrong to have a Randall Cobb if his cap number is not a good value and he misses half the games.

 

[HardRightEdge]

As did enough other teams to keep them out of the playoffs.

My point was in reaction to the list of Rams vet acquisitions from last offseason and the comment that player talent trumps "team", as though this were the NBA with 5 guys on the floor.

Somehow, the Patriots managed to win the prize with Michel at RB and a pair or wideouts named Hogan and Dorsett, and a beat up Gronkowski, and per a prior discussion starting OT's costing a grand total of $8 mil against the cap. It must be magic! Or Belichick went down to the crossroads and sold his soul to the devil. No, it's neither of those things.

 

[Half Empty]

Aha, mis-interpreted your post. Sorry.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

My point was in reaction to the list of Rams vet acquisitions from last offseason and the comment that player talent trumps "team", as though this were the NBA with 5 guys on the floor.

Somehow, the Patriots managed to win the prize with Michel at RB and a pair or wideouts named Hogan and Dorsett, and a beat up Gronkowski, and per a prior discussion starting OT's costing a grand total of $8 mil against the cap. It must be magic! Or Belichick went down to the crossroads and sold his soul to the devil. No, it's neither of those things.

Not sure we can acquire the best coach in the NFL in free agency or the draft though...I think everyone is pretty much agreement that the New England coach sort of makes comparisons to that team's personnel a little difficult at times; I mean, he managed to turn one of the best offenses into the NFL into something Blake Bortles would be ashamed to be associated with.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

The Steelers missed the playoffs while Conner performed at a level close to Bell.



Once again, how many rings has Randy Moss???

First, I would take 9-6-1 while missing the playoffs as a "down" season compared to what the Packers have experienced recently.

As for your "RINGZZZZZ!!!" argument; Dan Marino, Calvin Johnson, Tony Gonzalez, etc. would seem to imply that Super Bowls won isn't that relevant a stat. Unless you want to tell me that Barry Sanders was a locker room problem?

 

[Sunshinepacker]

It might be worth noting, or maybe not, that the cap cost of those 4 players last season was $32.6 mil, thanks to a QB on a rookie contract.

Now, Suh is a FA, Cooks cap number jumps from $5.4 to $15.3 mil, Peters number jumps from $1.7 to $9.1 mil, and Talib's still on the books at $8 mil, down $11 mil, but a year older. Joyner, Saffold, Fowler and Easley are free agents. Their top 51 cap liabilities are about $3 mil more than the Packers and they don't even have 51 guys under contract, which does not leave all that much cap space.

They have a big question: "What happened to Gurley?" A minor injury that slowed his roll? Or is 3 successive 300+ touch seasons taking its toll?

They went all-in, now the window is starting to close with the QB contract on the near horizon.

You have to reckon they'll want to keep Saffold. After that, for the Rams to keep the ball rolling, they'll have to rely on small ball free agency and the draft.

There's nothing wrong with having a Randall Cobb per se among some 28 starters and key rotational guys. It is wrong to have a Randall Cobb if his cap number is not a good value and he misses half the games.

You are correct, however, it should also be noted that the two big name WRs being discussed (Brown and OBJ), actually have VERY team friendly cap numbers, given their talent level, if a team trades for them. So in that regard, it's not that far fetched.

 

[PackAttack12]

First, I would take 9-6-1 while missing the playoffs as a "down" season compared to what the Packers have experienced recently.

As for your "RINGZZZZZ!!!" argument; Dan Marino, Calvin Johnson, Tony Gonzalez, etc. would seem to imply that Super Bowls won isn't that relevant a stat. Unless you want to tell me that Barry Sanders was a locker room problem?

The only position on the football field that might deserve some culpability in the "no rings" department is the quarterback position, only because the quarterback has the most influence on a game. However, even the quarterback can't control everything. It's not like a basketball player that's on the court at all times. A quarterback can't throw to himself or score by himself (99% of the time).

Troy Aikman has three Super Bowl victories, Dan Marino has zero. Which quarterback would you rather have? Of course you would go with Marino, putting aside what each guy has around them. All things being equal, and not knowing who your supporting cast of characters will be, you'd take Marino all day long.

When guys like Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson win Super Bowls, you know that you can't use Super Bowls as the only barameter for success.

Cris Carter never won a Super Bowl. Would I want him on my team??? Any damn day of the week.

Bottom line: You simply cannot hold "no rings" against a non-quarterback. And I'm iffy on quarterbacks.

 

[Mondio]

I agree that "no rings" is weak, but it's useful against the crowd that thinks "sign player X, we'll get a ring"

 

[HardRightEdge]

Not sure we can acquire the best coach in the NFL in free agency or the draft though...I think everyone is pretty much agreement that the New England coach sort of makes comparisons to that team's personnel a little difficult at times; I mean, he managed to turn one of the best offenses into the NFL into something Blake Bortles would be ashamed to be associated with.

The points of comparison to Belichick are to illustrate that in a supposedly copycat league the same assumptions are made year after year about what it takes to win when there is clear evidence that is not the case.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

It is a copycat league, the only problem is Belichick never stops evolving. He's like a smartphone, by the time other teams adjust to his current version he's already on his second operating system upgrade.

 

[Dantés]

The points of comparison to Belichick are to illustrate that in a supposedly copycat league the same assumptions are made year after year about what it takes to win when there is clear evidence that is not the case.

This is probably my biggest pet peeve about the NFL. Almost annually you see teams win it all in different ways. The obvious conclusion is that there are multiple paths to the Lombardi. And yet most fans, and seemingly several teams, fall into the trap of thinking that the most recent success is the only way to get the job done.

So you get things like...

You can't win a Super Bowl unless you have a QB on a rookie deal. Or...

You can't win a Super Bowl unless you have a savvy veteran QB. Or...

You can't win a Super Bowl unless you have a shut down defense. Or...

You can't win a Super Bowl unless you have an offense that scores 30+.

Blah, blah, blah... it's all reductionist nonsense.

To win a Super Bowl, you have to have a number of defined strengths and minimal weaknesses. The end.

 

[HardRightEdge]

You are correct, however, it should also be noted that the two big name WRs being discussed (Brown and OBJ), actually have VERY team friendly cap numbers, given their talent level, if a team trades for them. So in that regard, it's not that far fetched.

An acquirer of Beckham will take on 5 years / $77 million. I don't consider that particularly friendly. He's starting to look injury prone, missing considerable time the last 2 season. But first and formost the guy is a disruptive flake.

Brown looks relatively cheap at 3 years / $39 mil assuming a trade is made before the roster bunus is due. But if that deal costs a first rounder, then it doesn't look that cheap. Anyway, he wants all of the money on his current contract guaranteed and if he plays well at all in 2019 he'll be back with his hand out for a renegotiation next season. But first and foremost he quit on his team. No thanks.