Packers free agent rumors?

[jrock645]

$10m a year is "moderate?" I realize there's plenty of DL's making more, but not with the type of role Daniels has. Daniels is a 2 gapper, isn't allowed nor would he be suited to being set to run downhill after the QB. I'm not saying we overpaid, but I think Daniels got paid very well for his role.

 

[Carl]

In all fairness to the Lynch thing... Yeah we won the SB without him in 2010, but how much could he have changed things in 11 and 12? Yes, the 11 defense was atrocious, but the complete lack of an ability to run the ball despite being dared to do it was just as big of a deal. If the Pack could've run on that two deep safety gameplan the Giants beat them with, things could have gone a lot differently. And I think we all remember how bad the running game was in 12. Yeah, it's in the past and it's done but I get why people still mention it.

Yes, a running game would have helped in 2011. That team was 15-1 and won most of it's games easily though, including a win at the Giants when they beat their defense.

Even without a solid running game, that team was easily talented enough to win it all. Unfortunately, they didn't put it together when it mattered most.

 

[TeamTundra]

I'd still take Knighton , Hicks or Fairley over both Guion and Rajji in a heartbeat.

Do you realize that Knighton, Hicks, and Fairley are all on their third team in the past
three years? That's a huge red flag. I'm not saying Guion or Raji are better, but I think
you are over rating the other three players.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

$10m a year is "moderate?" I realize there's plenty of DL's making more, but not with the type of role Daniels has. Daniels is a 2 gapper, isn't allowed nor would he be suited to being set to run downhill after the QB. I'm not saying we overpaid, but I think Daniels got paid very well for his role.

Daniels is an elite player at his position and while he definitely got paid very well I´m absolutely convinced he would have been able to get even more in free agency. That´s why I like the deal.

Do you realize that Knighton, Hicks, and Fairley are all on their third team in the past
three years? That's a huge red flag. I'm not saying Guion or Raji are better, but I think
you are over rating the other three players.

There´s absolutely no doubt that Knighton, Hicks and Fairley are more talented players than Guion and Raji. It´s surprising that all of them are on the third team in as many years but I don´t have any idea about the reasons for it.

 

[sschind]

No problem Poker, that's exactly why I said it. I'm not one of those people.

 

[jetfixer]

Daniels is an elite player at his position and while he definitely got paid very well I´m absolutely convinced he would have been able to get even more in free agency. That´s why I like the deal.



There´s absolutely no doubt that Knighton, Hicks and Fairley are more talented players than Guion and Raji. It´s surprising that all of them are on the third team in as many years but I don´t have any idea about the reasons for it.

I have doubts that all those guys are better than Raji......but it really doesn't matter, no doubt they are better than a retired guy.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I have doubts that all those guys are better than Raji......but it really doesn't matter, no doubt they are better than a retired guy.

Guion too. He is no slouch... I like him a lot.

 

[PikeBadger]

I have doubts that all those guys are better than Raji......but it really doesn't matter, no doubt they are better than a retired guy.

I agree. I think Raji's athletic talent level is right up among the best. His biggest problem is he loses interest. If he had Daniel's desire, he'd be going into the HOF some day.

 

[Vrill]

Consistently make the playoffs, consistently exit early and/or in excruciating fashion. Home field advantage in the playoffs for the Pack hasn't meant much for some time.

Would you prefer the alternative? As in being the Cleveland Browns and a perennial loser perpetually picking in the top 5?

 

[Half Empty]

I didn't mind the Gory Years all that much. Following the band of lovable losers. The biggest plus is that I never expected to go very far, so each win was special - "this game against (fill in the blank) is our Super Bowl because (fill in the blank)" had some real meaning. Let the Browns put together a contender and still fail to win the prize - then I'd start to feel sorry for them. I understand how folks feel good about winning seasons, playoff appearances, et. al., but Packer fans are much likely to brag (and be able to cite, off the top of their heads) about NFL championships than those other things.

Hard remembering where this came from, though.

 

[PackerDNA]

I didn't mind the Gory Years all that much. Following the band of lovable losers. The biggest plus is that I never expected to go very far, so each win was special - "this game against (fill in the blank) is our Super Bowl because (fill in the blank)" had some real meaning. Let the Browns put together a contender and still fail to win the prize - then I'd start to feel sorry for them. I understand how folks feel good about winning seasons, playoff appearances, et. al., but Packer fans are much likely to brag (and be able to cite, off the top of their heads) about NFL championships than those other things.

Hard remembering where this came from, though.

I know what you mean. Probably my favorite such game was the wild 48-47 Monday night win over the eventual Super Bowl champ Redskins.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Hate to bring up the whole 2016 Free agent signings again, but Matt Forte sure looked impressive for the Jets yesterday!

22 carries for 96 yards and 5 receptions for 59 yards. While Starks (4 carries for 7 yards) was the cheaper option of the 2, can't help to think what having the 1-2 punch of Lacy and Forte could have done for the Packers offense.

 

[jrock645]

Just doesn't make sense investing that much in the backfield. Lacy barely gets enough touches as it is. We're too much of a pass first offense to have 2 backs needing to be fed. I think it would just breed frustration.

 

[Vrill]

I agree. Having Forte would have been awesome.

And hey, Ronnie Hillman is still available.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Just doesn't make sense investing that much in the backfield. Lacy barely gets enough touches as it is. We're too much of a pass first offense to have 2 backs needing to be fed. I think it would just breed frustration.

So you wouldn't shell out a million more for Forte then we shelled out for Starks? With Lacy still on a rookie contract, that isn't a lot invested in your RB's. I still like Starks and was hoping we would sign Forte, but when we didn't, I was glad to see Starks back.

I guess we will see how the 2 perform this year to further evaluate it.

 

[Vrill]

I think Forte would have been good in a utility role for us. Lining up at WR, slot, screens and so on.

 

[jrock645]

I just don't think there's room for 2 backs in this offense, for both to get a considerable number of carries. Does it really make sense to go get Forte but then he only get 3-4 touches on a regular basis? How much benefit would that really serve over Starks getting the same 3-4 touches?

Yes, I think Forte would be great to have, but not with AR at QB and MM calling the plays.

 

[Poppa San]

I recall Forte wanting to go to a place to be "the man" and not just a 3rd down back or role player.

 

[EvAn]

With the lack of D line depth I wouldn't mind bringing back Cullen Jenkins for a vet minimum

 

[jrock645]

With the lack of D line depth I wouldn't mind bringing back Cullen Jenkins for a vet minimum

eh... He's not the same guy anymore.

 

[EvAn]

He's been in the system, probably a vet minimum price, and got a sack and 3TFL in the preseason game he played in. The rookie linemen were non factors yesterday

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Just doesn't make sense investing that much in the backfield. Lacy barely gets enough touches as it is. We're too much of a pass first offense to have 2 backs needing to be fed. I think it would just breed frustration. I just don't think there's room for 2 backs in this offense, for both to get a considerable number of carries. Does it really make sense to go get Forte but then he only get 3-4 touches on a regular basis? How much benefit would that really serve over Starks getting the same 3-4 touches?

Well, if Starks continues to touch the ball only five times a game the Packers for sure overpaid to retain his services.

 

[jrock645]

Well, if Starks continues to touch the ball only five times a game the Packers for sure overpaid to retain his services.

they don't pay him to touch the ball 5 times a game. They pay him for for the fact he can be productive when Lacy misses time. And he will, because bruisers almost always miss a game or two.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

With the lack of D line depth I wouldn't mind bringing back Cullen Jenkins for a vet minimum

Jenkins isn't the same player that left after winning the Super Bowl in 2010. There's no need for the Packers to bring him in.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

they don't pay him to touch the ball 5 times a game. They pay him for for the fact he can be productive when Lacy misses time. And he will, because bruisers almost always miss a game or two.

Lacy has only missed a total of two games during his career so far.