LB Ahmad Brooks to the Packers

[C-Lee]

Please explain why 80% of our OLBs being injured makes you laugh out loud.

Just how injury prone our guys seem to be, it's a little comical at this point. Just trying to lighten the mood, man!

 

[Mike McCarthy]

What this you say??? Matthews and Perry hurt already??? Really, I didn't see this one coming at all. Sign him.

 

[brandon2348]

What's actually not so funny is just about everyone including myself saw this coming. They sure as hell better sign Brooks as a stop gap.

Not that my plans are always perfect but they wouldn't of included Clay Matthews or relying on Frackrell for that matter. We would be on to better pastures in those regards.


No sense in replaying my scenarios now but "money and moves" were available to solidify OLB. If this costs Packers another Super Bowl then time for Thompson to go.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yeah, we crazies who think you shouldn't cut high draft picks after one season... we're just a bunch of silly *****es.

I believe the point Half Empty was trying to make is that posters from both sides of the spectrum have a tough time admitting being wrong.

I don't think he merits a roster spot in most situations. That's me as a fan. Me as a personnel guy, he definitely stays on the team and gets 1 more year, possibly 2 to develop. That is due both to his upside, which has not gone anywhere despite being covered by a patina of bad performances these last two years, and the fact that we do not have anyone else on the squad who has shown enough to make the opening of the roster spot worth the risk of losing the depth, quality of said depth aside.

I'm not sure who you're talking about in this post but neither Spriggs nor Fackrell have played in the league for two years as both were rookies in 2016.

I felt the same and I liked Ragland coming out of Bama, but have no idea how his recovery from the torn ACL went. Considering we spent 4th rounders on both Martinez and Ryan, I wouldn't have flinched at the same for Reggie.

It seems that Ragland wouldn't have been a great fit for the Packers defense as the moves the team has made this offseason indicates the coaching staff wants to have more athletic players on the field at inside linebacker.

 

[Dantés]

I believe the point Half Empty was trying to make is that posters from both sides of the spectrum have a tough time admitting to being wrong.

Wrong about what though? Because I'm not seeing very many people saying that Fackrell or Spriggs will be good. Maybe here and there, but most are just saying it's too early to say after one year. That's a lot different from the "they suck, cut 'em" crowd. Even if they bust, it will not have been wrong to say it was too early after one season.

 

[Candidate for Deletion]

I'm not sure who you're talking about in this post but neither Spriggs nor Fackrell have played in the league for two years as both were rookies in 2016

I was including this year in the "bad peformances thus far" category, as giving that I was advocating for keeping him(personnel brain). Were I advocating for dropping him (fan brain) I wouldn't dare refer to this year as a full year of examples of performance - I'd be roasted alive.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I was including this year in the "bad peformances thus far" category, as giving that I was advocating for keeping him(personnel brain). Were I advocating for dropping him (fan brain) I wouldn't dare refer to this year as a full year of examples of performance - I'd be roasted alive.

I usually try to CMA (cover my ***) by saying "to this point in his professional career........"

 

[Half Empty]

Wrong about what though? Because I'm not seeing very many people saying that Fackrell or Spriggs will be good. Maybe here and there, but most are just saying it's too early to say after one year. That's a lot different from the "they suck, cut 'em" crowd. Even if they bust, it will not have been wrong to say it was too early after one season.

The last part is where I disagree, at least if one is going to allow that evaluating talent is an essential part of why management is paid what they get. If it's a matter of waiting until it's obvious to the casual observer that a player isn't going to cut it, I could do that for way less than TT, MM, et. al. get. And, even with the current hierarchy, there have been some of draftees cut after one year. My point was just that people calling for cuts after one disappointing year are no worse than those that argue for a player to take up a roster spot when having showed nothing (i.e., the "they suck, let's keep 'em around" crowd).

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The last part is where I disagree, at least if one is going to allow that evaluating talent is an essential part of why management is paid what they get. If it's a matter of waiting until it's obvious to the casual observer that a player isn't going to cut it, I could do that for way less than TT, MM, et. al. get. And, even with the current hierarchy, there have been some of draftees cut after one year. My point was just that people calling for cuts after one disappointing year are no worse than those that argue for a player to take up a roster spot when having showed nothing (i.e., the "they suck, let's keep 'em around" crowd).

Couldn't agree more. As fans, most of us are privy to a small percentage of what really goes into evaluating a player, as well as how that player fits within the team now and in the future. TT and the Coaches on the other hand should have all the available information that can be gathered to form a pretty solid opinion. This goes both ways too.....players that appear to us fans as studs and those who appear to be duds and everyone in between. I joke about Jeff Janis, but I accept that the Packer organization sees value in employing him. So while it is fun to try and critique moves made by the Packers, I never try to fool myself into thinking I could have done a lot better in part or whole. Coaches and GM's lose their jobs when their bad decisions start out numbering their good decisions. Us fans, we never get fired. I'm not keeping tabs, but I have to think the Packer FO is sitting on the positive side of that balance sheet and I am still sitting safely on my couch.

 

[PackAttack12]

Thompson doesn't answer any questions regarding Brooks' visit, which isn't surprising.

When asked if he didn't do enough at OLB in the offseason, Thompson had no interest in "retrospecting".

In other news, McCarthy says Clay Matthews' injury is not a long term concern. Didn't elaborate on what it is, though.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Thompson doesn't answer any questions regarding Brooks' visit, which isn't surprising.

When asked if he didn't do enough at OLB in the offseason, Thompson had no interest in "retrospecting".

In other news, McCarthy says Clay Matthews' injury is not a long term concern. Didn't elaborate on what it is, though.

TT never "retrospects".

Hoping Clay just has a bad case of split ends. I hesitate to use the words "injury prone" with Clay, but I think it is safe to say, he probably won't be on the field for all 4 quarters of all 16+ games.

 

[AmishMafia]

The last part is where I disagree, at least if one is going to allow that evaluating talent is an essential part of why management is paid what they get. If it's a matter of waiting until it's obvious to the casual observer that a player isn't going to cut it, I could do that for way less than TT, MM, et. al. get. And, even with the current hierarchy, there have been some of draftees cut after one year. My point was just that people calling for cuts after one disappointing year are no worse than those that argue for a player to take up a roster spot when having showed nothing (i.e., the "they suck, let's keep 'em around" crowd).

Talent evaluation is the easy part. It's the psychology evaluation that is tricky and that is an ongoing evaluation. Case in point is Dupree, as physically talented as Jerry Rice. Jerry Rice is Jerry Rice not because he was faster, taller, or smarter than we everyone else, it was because he was driven and absolutely focused on working to be better. Some players get the big first paycheck and start enjoying things in life which takes away from the football focus. Can they mature in time to maximize their youth and talent? The science is evolving but still a lot of wait and see.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Talent evaluation is the easy part. It's the psychology evaluation that is tricky and that is an ongoing evaluation. Case in point is Dupree, as physically talented as Jerry Rice. Jerry Rice is Jerry Rice not because he was faster, taller, or smarter than we everyone else, it was because he was driven and absolutely focused on working to be better. Some players get the big first paycheck and start enjoying things in life which takes away from the football focus. Can they mature in time to maximize their youth and talent? The science is evolving but still a lot of wait and see.

Agreed, but I would add......while the current level of talent is easy to evaluate.....all the factors that go into determining the level and progress of that talent in the future is full of landmines.

 

[Candidate for Deletion]

Agreed, but I would add......while the current level of talent is easy to evaluate.....all the factors that go into determining the level and progress of that talent in the future is full of landmines.

For the path is dark, and full of landmines.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Well if Brooks doesn't work out, sounds like the Bills are having a Fire Sale.....should the Packers go shopping? Better asked....will TT go shopping in Buffalo to try to improve this team? I doubt it.

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/...rs-go-shopping-at-the-buffalo-bills-fire-sale

 

[AmishMafia]

I am of the mindset, that this will be a good signing.

He has to be better than our 2nd tier guys.

Let's get it done TT. We need a place holder player till Geronimo gets back from suspension any way. A 1 game prove it deal.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Wrong about what though? Because I'm not seeing very many people saying that Fackrell or Spriggs will be good. Maybe here and there, but most are just saying it's too early to say after one year. That's a lot different from the "they suck, cut 'em" crowd. Even if they bust, it will not have been wrong to say it was too early after one season.

The team will have made a mistake in holding on to either Fackrell or Spriggs for another season or two if neither develops into a significant improved player though.

I was including this year in the "bad peformances thus far" category, as giving that I was advocating for keeping him(personnel brain).

While there's reason to be concerned about either Fackrell or Spriggs having a positive impact this season based on their performance during preseason games and practices I truly believe it's way too early to include this year into evaluating either of them.

 

[Candidate for Deletion]

While there's reason to be concerned about either Fackrell or Spriggs having a positive impact this season based on their performance during preseason games and practices I truly believe it's way too early to include this year into evaluating either of them.

That just depends how seriously you are taking the conversation (and why I keep qualifying when I'm just acting like a curmudgeon fan)

 

[brandon2348]

While there's reason to be concerned about either Fackrell or Spriggs having a positive impact this season based on their performance during preseason games and practices I truly believe it's way too early to include this year into evaluating either of them.

Frackrell will be 26 this year. You seem a Little "behind on the curve" on your analysis here.

You gonna wait till he is 30?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Frackrell will be 26 this year. You seem a Little "behind on the curve" on your analysis here.

You gonna wait till he is 30?

Fackrell turning 26 years old in November doesn't change the fact that he has only been in the league for a season and therefore it being too early to give up on a third round pick.

 

[brandon2348]

Fackrell turning 26 years old in November doesn't change the fact that he has only been in the league for a season and therefore it being too early to give up on a third round pick.

He was a bad pick. Time to move on.

 

[Candidate for Deletion]

He was a bad pick. Time to move on.

He wasn't Spriggs bad, and you only move on if you have adequate depth otherwise. Even I, who wants to legitimately explore the idea of cutting Spriggs to see if he makes it to our PS, only want to do so if we have other guys who move past him. Same with Fackrell. I'm not impressed, and I find it hard to foresee a scenario where the lives up to his draft status, but until you find me somebody else who will play in his stead - that's what we got!

 

[Dantés]

The team will have made a mistake in holding on to either Fackrell or Spriggs for another season or two if neither develops into a significant improved player.

That's such utter nonsense.

There will always be a certain amount of drafted players that don't make it in the NFL.

It is virtually never a mistake to keep a 2nd or 3rd round pick more than one season to give them a chance to pay off. Sometimes it won't work out in the long run, but that didn't make the decision to give it a chance a mistake.

The mistake would be the knee jerk reaction of letting guys go because they don't immediately meet expectations.

 

[Dantés]

The last part is where I disagree, at least if one is going to allow that evaluating talent is an essential part of why management is paid what they get. If it's a matter of waiting until it's obvious to the casual observer that a player isn't going to cut it, I could do that for way less than TT, MM, et. al. get. And, even with the current hierarchy, there have been some of draftees cut after one year. My point was just that people calling for cuts after one disappointing year are no worse than those that argue for a player to take up a roster spot when having showed nothing (i.e., the "they suck, let's keep 'em around" crowd).

Yes, they are worse.

If I guaranteed that Fackrell or Spriggs is a future stud, that would be the comparable counterpart to those saying they're not worth keeping and we should cut them loose now.

All I'm saying, and all anyone reasonable is saying, is that it's way too soon to move on and we don't know what they will be. In other words, give it more than one season before you decide to throw in the towel. That's not a guarantee one way or the other. It's merely a call for some sanity when it comes to how much time players are given to develop.

I should think this would be pretty obvious.

 

[Mondio]

If someone is a complete **** up you cut ties early. if someone makes a mistake, you weight the options, most likely keep them around. If someone is struggling thru something and working hard and has the physical tools, you build it and see where it goes. Sometimes that takes time. It's the same type of people that had traded off rodgers last year and fired MM when things weren't going well when all they needed was to work thru some things and they roared to life. It happens, to everyone and if they're committed and working thru their struggles, chances are they're going to get to where they need to be. It doesn't always happen on your time table and it certainly doesn't usually happen in a season. Almost every player, barring injury, is better in year 3-4 than they were in years 1 and 2.