PackinMSP
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2018
- Messages
- 797
- Reaction score
- 56
For a 1st and a 2nd. Who would do it?
Jalen Ramsey
- Thread starter PackinMSP
- Start date
RRyder
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2014
- Messages
- 1,781
- Reaction score
- 192
The question is why would Jacksonville?
We could offer them Alexander and one of next years 1sts and they'd still tell us to get bent
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Sorry, Packers have more pressing needs than another CB. Especially a guy with one year left on his contact and is going to want a massive payday. Sorry, not worth giving up that that kind of draft capital and future cash....Pass.
From what I’ve seen out of Alexander.... i’m excited about seeing him progress. I’m not convinced that we won’t need another cornerback however... I don’t think King’s body is going to make it in the NFL. That being said, I agree the Packers have bigger needs, and no I would not give up even one day one draft pick at that position right now.
Curly Calhoun
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2015
- Messages
- 2,123
- Reaction score
- 575
Favre>Rodgers259
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2015
- Messages
- 2,243
- Reaction score
- 130
I am rooting for King, but he may be relegated to playing in the Nickel and the Dime due to injury concerns. Tony Brown seems like he could be a year or so away from being a serviceable starter, but if I were Gute I would draft a CB in the 6th or 7th Round as there are some very intriguing size/speed prospects still available at that point. If Gute likes tall WRs, then he might like tall CBs too.
But yea as much as I love Ramsey, we can't afford him with the needs we already have.
rodell330
Cheesehead
I heard he may be on the trade block this summer and as much as I like Ramsey I would pass. I think Alexander is on his way to stardom and if Kevin King could ever stay healthy (big if) we have a nice tandem on the corners...not to mention they used a 2nd on Jackson who I still think is going to be a nice payer himself. They just need to find a dang safety who can cover for the love of God. Which again, is why they need to get Landon Collins.
Unless they replaced David Caldwell with Jeff Carson.
Arod2gjdd
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 605
- Reaction score
- 171
A first AND a second? Are you high? Ramsey is decent, but he can't keep his mouth shut and is a "leader" on a collapsing defense. That's not even taking into account that we've drafted three corners in the past two drafts! A first AND A second is a steep price for a great player filling a dire need, which Ramsey does not. This team has MAJOR areas of weakness, and CB and WR are not one of them, so I really do not understand these threads that suggest going out and getting a big, expensive name at two positions which we have expended a lot of draft capital and have young, controllable, cheap assets. Get me a really good OLB instead.
Does not compute.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
The Jaguars have made it clear that they aren't interested in trading Ramsey.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
I would rather talk about acquiring 1-2 Safeties and 1-2 OLB's. Just because the media writes a story about "this guy or that guy possibly being trade bait", if that comes at too high of a cost (draft capital and $$$), at a position currently not in need, save your ink when it comes to talking about him becoming a Packer.
Probably no matter what happens in the next 6 games, once the coaching decisions for 2019 and beyond are made, there has to be a lot of discussion on filling immediate needs in Free Agency and future needs in the draft. I'm tired of going into the draft with big holes and thinking a #14 pick or later is going to immediately take care of it.
Probably no matter what happens in the next 6 games, once the coaching decisions for 2019 and beyond are made, there has to be a lot of discussion on filling immediate needs in Free Agency and future needs in the draft. I'm tired of going into the draft with big holes and thinking a #14 pick or later is going to immediately take care of it.
gbgary
Cheesehead
they may not be interested now but they have massive issues facing them with resigning their defensive stars and they have a less than good qb. this off-season they may decide their window has closed and want to rebuild. they very well could be a selling team. let's wait and see but i bet they'll deal him. he'd be worth the NO 1st, with a later pick added, but i wouldn't use the GB pick if bosa is still in play for them. the Packers have to do something because of the williams/king situation. this off-season is really going to tell us what gute's made of. he's got one strike now with the mack failure.
Last edited:
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Unless the Packers think 2 players out of Alexander, Jackson and King have no future in Green Bay, I just don't see why people are talking about spending more draft capital on a guy like Ramsey, as well as the money he is going to command.
JA looks legit. Jackson has had an up and down rookie year and King...well all about if he can stay healthy.
I would be sooooo pissed if we spent more high resources on CB, if we didn't need to.
gbgary
Cheesehead
because it's about winning a SB in the 3-4 years that rodgers has left. he's the best cb and they'll have the cap room. if you don't think they have a chance for a SB then you shouldn't make the deal...which then begs the question, why resign rodgers?
Your last sentence got the red x and lost all the credibility you had with the beginning of your post. If you honestly think the Packers could have and should have paid that price for Mack terming it a failure... I don’t even know how to respond. And notice I used both the words “could and should” because both apply..as in couldn’t and shouldn’t
Mike McCarthy
Cheesehead
I’d say yes if we somehow package Perry in this hypothetical deal, I’m positive that would be too much for them to turn down lol.
gbgary
Cheesehead
it was a failure. they should have added another pick to top the chi offer. if you can't see what he would have added to this team then i don't know how to respond. resigning rodgers puts all their decision making in the "short-term" catagory to win a SB.
Just so we are clear.... Your position is that we should have gotten rid of Aaron Rodgers so that we could have Mack?
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Even if you want to go all in for one year, feast or famine, there are better ways to do it than to bring in Jalen Ramsey. If the mind set of Gute is "2019 is THE year and only year that matters", then you trade all your draft picks and cap space to acquire immediate impact players at positions in immediate need. I would but OLB, S, ILB, DL and OL ahead of CB at this point. Not to mention, if its just a one year "all or nothing", lets go get the top rated WR as well.
gbgary
Cheesehead
no...how'd you come up with that? i'm saying that resigning rodgers is the reason you do what it takes to get mack.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
I'm not going to try and find my post at the time of the trade, but I did some calculating of what the Packers would have had to offer the Raiders to "beat the Bears" offer, basing it off of the draft value trade chart that many use. At that time, it would have been 3 first rounders for the Packers to come close. Not even going to rehash the $$ cost of trying to carry both Mack and Rodgers. Sure, Mack is doing some great things in Chicago and I would have loved to have had him, but he doesn't improve our offense this year and hinders the amount of money the Packers have to spend on improving that offense, as well as the defense. I also think Chicago had a better defense than the Packers when they acquired Mack, so his impact there has been even greater due to the talent around him. One guy on defense isn't going to be a big enough difference maker to justify that kind of draft capital or money, in my opinion.
gbgary
Cheesehead
not a "one-year feast or famine." you have to sign ramsey if they made the deal...but yes everything they do this off-season is about what the next 3-4 years can bring. otherwise there was no reason to resign rodgers.
gbgary
Cheesehead
maybe not a 3rd 1st but a 2nd or 3rd added may have done it. the cap room would have been there or they wouldn't have even tried.
who knew our offense would be as broken as it is.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
No offense intended, but you have two conversations going about the Packers should have signed Mack and now should trade for and sign Ramsey....have you seen what he will be asking for in his new contract? Just like Mack, he wants to be the highest paid player at his position. How many of those kinds of guys can we sign, when we already have the highest paid player in the NFL?
I came up with that because resigning Rodgers is one of the major reason there is no way the Packers could also sign Mack... setting aside the draft choices and what it would have taken to get Mack from the Raiders, The cost in salary cap to the Packers would have been insurmountable in the short term, and overwhelming in the short long term. So in order to get Mack signed this year... the team would have had to be decimated... but wait even doing that... good luck putting a team around Rodgers and Mack because there would be no money left. Now back to what we would have had to give up... our two first rounders were not equal to Chicago’s so that means we would have had to give up those plus more... how much more? who knows... two higher first round picks might be all the Raiders really cared about. But I suppose that shouldn’t matter we could have probably just given the Raiders all our picks since we wouldn’t have any cap money anyway. Sometimes wanting something does not mean you can have it.
Similar threads
