Why the Packers have to win the division.

[RepStar15]

As much as I would love for the packers to make a trade by 4pm today, it is highly unlikely. If Rollins is back ASAP, I can deal with Rollins/Gunter in the secondary until Randall comes back. We have to give it to Gunter after last week's performance. Sure, he did not make the big play we needed him too, but for the first time this season we did not give up the big play either.
They seem to be putting up more points without Lacey/Starks taking half of the reps. Unless they do a deal with a CB to just have him for the rest of the season, there is no need to make a long term trade with any of the guys that are actively being shopped. We really only need to lock up 3 guys this off season (Perry, Tretter and Bulaga). This leaves lots of cap space to re-evaluate our depth chart at the seasons end.

 

[El Guapo]

Very true but the injuries on defense this year have been much worse. While not as plentiful, no team's defense can withstand the top three corners all being out. It's also important to remember that the Packers in 2010 were a much more talented team. For all the credit that Thompson gets, and deserves much of it, that 2010 Packers team had more talent on offense (even considering Finley and Grant were out most of the year) and the difference in talent level on defense was HUGE; while Burnett missed much of the year on IR, the Packers' defense in 2010 featured Woodson, Jenkins, Collins, Matthews and the good years of Bishop and Raji.

In a few years, you might be arguing that we were getting the good years of Mike Daniels, Nick Perry, Blake Martinez, Dix, and Burnett. Raji played well in 2010 but didn't announce his presence until his belly dance/INT in the championship game. Other players like Starks didn't emerge until the playoffs. I think that it's too early to write off this defense. We also won with players like Erik Walden, Frank Zombo, Charlie Peprah, and (in the Super Bowl) Jarrett Bush - our Demitri Goodson of 2010.

The tools are there.

 

[El Guapo]

At this point in the season, or really at any point of the year, I don't see TT trading away much more than a jelly sandwich for another player (Niles Davis like). IMO opinion, this is one area that separates TT from Belichick, the willingness to roll the dice on a high end FA or trade that at the end of the day, improves his team immediately and may end up costing something on the backside in the lost potential of a drafted player and a nudge to the cap.

Let's not forget all of the cap discussions everyone had during the offseason, about how stressed our cap will be with upcoming free agents. That often gets lost during the hunt.

 

[RepStar15]

At this point in the season, or really at any point of the year, I don't see TT trading away much more than a jelly sandwich for another player (Niles Davis like). IMO opinion, this is one area that separates TT from Belichick, the willingness to roll the dice on a high end FA or trade that at the end of the day, improves his team immediately and may end up costing something on the backside in the lost potential of a drafted player and a nudge to the cap.

Does trading Jamie Collins and getting nothing in return make the Patriots defense better? They traded him for a 3rd round conditional pick in 2018, which they would have recieved if they let him walk in FA anyway. They are a Super Bowl caliber team, there is no reason not to have him man out the rest of the season, unless they are looking to open up a roster spot for the trade deadline today.

Did trading Chandler Jones make the Patriots defense better? They are the bottom 5 in pass rush this year, when last year they were top 5. In exchange they recieved Jonathan Cooper (who got cut this year) and a second round draft pick which they traded for a 3rd and 4th (whom they selected Guard Joe Thunder and WR Malcolm Mitchell--> neither of whom are that great). I understand this trade because Jones wanted to much money and they wanted to keep Hightower, COLLINS and Malcom Butler the following year. The Jamie Collins trade makes no sense!

If TT traded away Nick Perry right now for a 3rd round conditional pick in 2018, I would be pissed!

 

[Un4GivN]

As much as I would love for the packers to make a trade by 4pm today, it is highly unlikely. If Rollins is back ASAP, I can deal with Rollins/Gunter in the secondary until Randall comes back. We have to give it to Gunter after last week's performance. Sure, he did not make the big play we needed him too, but for the first time this season we did not give up the big play either.
They seem to be putting up more points without Lacey/Starks taking half of the reps. Unless they do a deal with a CB to just have him for the rest of the season, there is no need to make a long term trade with any of the guys that are actively being shopped. We really only need to lock up 3 guys this off season (Perry, Tretter and Bulaga). This leaves lots of cap space to re-evaluate our depth chart at the seasons end.

Didn't we give up a 50 yard touchdown early?

And yes you will likely score more points by throwing the ball like you are in the arena league. But that doesn't always translate to victories. When your defense can't stop anyone and your 3 and outs take about 16 seconds. It puts an even bigger strain on your defense. Added to that, you need to close out games and cold weather is on its way. Passing 50+ times a game is not a permanent answer.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

At this point in the season, or really at any point of the year, I don't see TT trading away much more than a jelly sandwich for another player (Niles Davis like). IMO opinion, this is one area that separates TT from Belichick, the willingness to roll the dice on a high end FA or trade that at the end of the day, improves his team immediately and may end up costing something on the backside in the lost potential of a drafted player and a nudge to the cap.

In addition Belichick often receives a compensatory picks either for free agents he signed to a one year deal or a rental player he traded for.

We really only need to lock up 3 guys this off season (Perry, Tretter and Bulaga).

Once again, Bulaga is signed through the 2019 season.

Does trading Jamie Collins and getting nothing in return make the Patriots defense better? They traded him for a 3rd round conditional pick in 2018, which they would have recieved if they let him walk in FA anyway. They are a Super Bowl caliber team, there is no reason not to have him man out the rest of the season, unless they are looking to open up a roster spot for the trade deadline today.

Did trading Chandler Jones make the Patriots defense better? They are the bottom 5 in pass rush this year, when last year they were top 5. In exchange they recieved Jonathan Cooper (who got cut this year) and a second round draft pick which they traded for a 3rd and 4th (whom they selected Guard Joe Thunder and WR Malcolm Mitchell--> neither of whom are that great). I understand this trade because Jones wanted to much money and they wanted to keep Hightower, COLLINS and Malcom Butler the following year. The Jamie Collins trade makes no sense!

If TT traded away Nick Perry right now for a 3rd round conditional pick in 2018, I would be pissed!

Absolutely agree that the Patriots trading Collins is extremely hard to understand.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Does trading Jamie Collins and getting nothing in return make the Patriots defense better? They traded him for a 3rd round conditional pick in 2018, which they would have recieved if they let him walk in FA anyway.

You are making the assumption that the Patriots would have received a conditional pick had they let Collins walk in FA, there is no guarantee of a conditional pick, but Belichick just made sure they will get something for him.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

You are making the assumption that the Patriots would have received a conditional pick had they let Collins walk in FA, there is no guarantee of a conditional pick, but Belichick just made sure they will get something for him.

While that's true trading a core defensive player doesn't make a whole lot of sense for a Super Bowl contender at this point in the season.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

While that's true trading a core defensive player doesn't make a whole lot of sense for a Super Bowl contender at this point in the season.

Sounds like his playing time had been reduced and contract negotiations weren't going anywhere. Belichick saw an opportunity to get something for a guy they weren't resigning and was expendable due to other players abilities.

Hindsight is 20/20 but had we known what we know about the Sitton situation as well as Taylor's ability to play RG, we would have been better off getting rid of Sitton last year at this time and at least getting something for him.

 

[Half Empty]

You are making the assumption that the Patriots would have received a conditional pick had they let Collins walk in FA, there is no guarantee of a conditional pick, but Belichick just made sure they will get something for him.

I assume you mean compensatory pick, and if Collins' didn't get a contract worth a 3-4 round pick to the Pats, then the trade makes even more sense for them.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I assume you mean compensatory pick, and if Collins' didn't get a contract worth a 3-4 round pick to the Pats, then the trade makes even more sense for them.

yes...compensatory.....thanks for the correction.

 

[RepStar15]

Didn't we give up a 50 yard touchdown early?

And yes you will likely score more points by throwing the ball like you are in the arena league. But that doesn't always translate to victories. When your defense can't stop anyone and your 3 and outs take about 16 seconds. It puts an even bigger strain on your defense. Added to that, you need to close out games and cold weather is on its way. Passing 50+ times a game is not a permanent answer.

Gunter did not give up the 50 yard play...

 

[Un4GivN]

Gunter did not give up the 50 yard play...

You said "we", so I assumed you meant as a defense. Not just Gunter, my bad.

 

[PikeBadger]

Sounds like his playing time had been reduced and contract negotiations weren't going anywhere. Belichick saw an opportunity to get something for a guy they weren't resigning and was expendable due to other players abilities.

Hindsight is 20/20 but had we known what we know about the Sitton situation as well as Taylor's ability to play RG, we would have been better off getting rid of Sitton last year at this time and at least getting something for him.

The time to get rid of Sitton was just prior to the draft or during it. The only thing I can think of is that they wanted to see Lane Taylor in camp before committing to that decision.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The time to get rid of Sitton was just prior to the draft or during it. The only thing I can think of is that they wanted to see Lane Taylor in camp before committing to that decision.

I agree with you...the Sitton move could have happened way sooner then it actually did, for the Packers to have gotten something in return. I was just saying....crystal ball approach at this time of year. Comparing what Belichick did with Collins VS. what the Packers did with Sitton.

Even if the Packers wanted to assess Taylor in camp before making the decision to let go of Sitton, they could have done that weeks prior to the cut deadline and gotten something for him. But we don't need to rehash that topic.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

In a few years, you might be arguing that we were getting the good years of Mike Daniels, Nick Perry, Blake Martinez, Dix, and Burnett. Raji played well in 2010 but didn't announce his presence until his belly dance/INT in the championship game. Other players like Starks didn't emerge until the playoffs. I think that it's too early to write off this defense. We also won with players like Erik Walden, Frank Zombo, Charlie Peprah, and (in the Super Bowl) Jarrett Bush - our Demitri Goodson of 2010.

The tools are there.

I'm not arguing that the players you listed above aren't playing well but nobody could argue that this defense has better players than the 2010 team. I mean, you're talking Nick Collins in his prime, Charles Woodson in his prime (for the Packers anyway), plus the best years of Desmond Bishop and Cullen Jenkins. That year's defense won with Walden, Zombo, etc. because there were such great players to compensate. I like some of the guys on this defense but there's no real comparison in talent level between the two teams; 2010 wins going away. Just because we're getting the best year of Nick Perry doesn't mean he's as good as Clay Matthews was in 2010, or that the best year from HaHa means he's playing as well as Charles Woodson in 2010.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

the best year from HaHa means he's playing as well as Charles Woodson in 2010.

Ha Ha is having a good year? I was thinking this was his worst year yet, but maybe I'm not seeing what he is doing behind the scenes?

but I agree with you, I will take the 2010 defense over what we have seen so far from this defense. I am also holding out hope that this defense will improve once healthier.

 

[OldSchool101]

My caveat is playing up to their potential and not suffering any more major injuries, especially at QB. This team could be set up to really make a run if and when we start getting Cook, Rollins, Randall, Mathews and possibly Lacy or Shields back. I like Shields, but at this point if we can get Rollins and Randall back, I will take a healthy and rested Lacy over Shields to return for the playoffs.

I agree on the Lacy comment. It's interesting the silver lining behind this year is that our bench is getting valuable playing time and we are still above .500.
While there will always be injuries, just imagine if we + netted any 3-4 of the following players Cobb, Montgomery, Lacy, Jared Cook, Clay, Randall or Rollins back in the groove.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I agree on the Lacy comment. It's interesting the silver lining behind this year is that our bench is getting valuable playing time and we are still above .500.
While there will always be injuries, just imagine if we + netted any 3-4 of the following players Cobb, Montgomery, Lacy, Jared Cook, Clay, Randall or Rollins back in the groove.

Agreed. With all the playing time our young guys are getting at WR and CB, we are going to have the deepest roster at those 2 positions in the NFL come 2017.....oh wait a minute....we already had that to start this year

But you are right, survive the stretch without injured starters and hope the experience the young guys are getting pays back dividends down the road.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

By the end of the month, if not sooner I would hope that Cobb, Montgomery, Cook, Matthews and Rollins are all back. If we can win at least 2 if not 3 (or 4) games in Nov. we will be in good shape. Getting Randall and Lacy back sometime in Dec. will just make us that much better. Just have to keep our fingers crossed that we don't lose anyone else along the way.

 

[grampi]

If the Packers play up to their potential I don't see any opponent the team isn't capable of beating on the remaining schedule. With that being said I expect them to struggle in at least one or two contests.

GB hasn't played up to their potential for a season and a half now...

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

GB hasn't played up to their potential for a season and a half now...

As much as I want to agree with you, I think the fans of many teams are saying the same thing. In the case of the Packers, for awhile it was a good excuse, but I have gotten tired of hearing it as well as saying it. Sometimes I think we confuse perfection with potential. I've grown to accept that the Packers will be competitive on any given Sunday and if things are firing on all cylinders, so be it, they most likely will win that day.

 

[Un4GivN]

As much as I want to agree with you, I think the fans of many teams are saying the same thing. In the case of the Packers, for awhile it was a good excuse, but I have gotten tired of hearing it as well as saying it. Sometimes I think we confuse perfection with potential. I've grown to accept that the Packers will be competitive on any given Sunday and if things are firing on all cylinders, so be it, they most likely will win that day.

I think what gets frustrating is having a once in a generation passer like Rodgers and not playing well around him. Slow playing roster moves, boring schemes for about a year, multiple years of misses on high draft picks on defense.

I only consider about 3 quarterbacks as truly elite. Year in year out. Brady, Rodgers, Roethlisberger. When those teams don't live up to expectations I think they take harder criticism then others because they have that "piece" that is missing from so many teams.

 

[grampi]

As much as I want to agree with you, I think the fans of many teams are saying the same thing. In the case of the Packers, for awhile it was a good excuse, but I have gotten tired of hearing it as well as saying it. Sometimes I think we confuse perfection with potential. I've grown to accept that the Packers will be competitive on any given Sunday and if things are firing on all cylinders, so be it, they most likely will win that day.

I'm not talking about perfection, I'm talking about the way the Packers USED to play 3 or 4 years ago, of which I think they're still capable...

 

[grampi]

I only consider about 3 quarterbacks as truly elite. Year in year out. Brady, Rodgers, Roethlisberger.

I would add Breze to that list as well...