Packernet - Latest Comments

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

BubbaOne — Wed, 16 May 2012 12:21:09 -0000

Rick,
Now that Perry lined up on the left side, if he stays there:

Does it change your thinking in any way?
What are the differences between the Leo and Elephant?
CM3 played ROLB before. Does moving back there play to his strength, more accomodates Perry, or doesn't really matter?
I watched a CM3 highlight video from 2010 and was surprised at how many pressures/sacks he had coming up the inside. Do you expect Capers to go back to this? Does it matter which side he lines up on to then blitz inside?

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

Bummer — Tue, 15 May 2012 09:05:05 -0000

Sometimes (not always) bankers and lawyers get into stuff more dirty than cow manure.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

iccyfan — Sun, 13 May 2012 12:26:51 -0000

It's a given that a certain segment of the Packer fan base, namely those who hate TT, are going to criticize the talent the Packers will be forced to jettison. My position on that topic is, it's awesome the Packers are so talented we have difficult decisions to make! Not so long ago, Mike Sherman kept two punters (B.J. Sander) on the roster; in TT's first year we kept some fat-butt rookie OG from Michigan State and started him! Those days are long-gone, but it's a good thing we're agonizing about the players we won't be able to retain...

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

Rick — Sat, 12 May 2012 20:12:34 -0000

The correct order of back ups for the last 6 years at GB is

Rodgers to Flynn to ???

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

Larry — Sat, 12 May 2012 17:43:44 -0000

Flynn was that much better, in fact about $6M a year better, GB couldn't sign Flynn...they don't have the cash given the needs in the next 12 months and they don't have the cap. The #2 QB is strictly low budget. He's a minimum salary vet or a developed mid to late round pick or a UFA that slides through the cracks.

If Coleman plays well in the pre-season they may have to keep him of the 53 with Harrell. Usually the #3 is on the PS but maybe B.J. can play.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

LarryAz — Sat, 12 May 2012 15:28:26 -0000

Couple of comments: My reference to unhappyness stems from the fact that some very good talent is going to be cut, not necessarily DD per se, cap or no cap you carry your best two QBs which tells me that Flynn had reached his zenith with the Pack and wasn't that much better than Harrell-we'll see how far out on that limb I am, and finally everybody on this blog knows what I think of H because of the body of work at TT, but I've got to say this Coleman kid has really got me leaning. There is just something about him that looks NFL QB to me. I'm sure the cap increases anyway and we have those 7,000 extra seats. Heh, heh. That'll pay for my new Zeke.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

Larry — Sat, 12 May 2012 07:25:44 -0000

LarryAZ, I don't think fans will be unhappy at all. The team went 15-1 last year and lost its first playoff game, change is expected and DD was limited to 37 catches. Most fans probably see his time up. He's a great person and had a great career.

You mention Montana/Young...that pre-salary cap. The reality is that Rodgers will command 15-20MM per year in the very near future. (Manning/Brady money) and is worth it, CM3 is due as well and is worth his money and then the line includes Jennings/Bulaga/Raji. If you want to pay a #2 QB then something else has to give. TT hasn't had a high paid backup QB in the past, instead using drafted players until the contract is up and then bringing another off the shelf.

Flynn to Harrell to Coleman...O, my!

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

LarryAz — Fri, 11 May 2012 14:08:47 -0000

You forgot Steve Young who sat behind Montana from '87 to '92. It can happen and you can afford it. Yes, Young did not like it but it worked and he did get his chance. I'd put your prediction of AR having 10 seasons left in the wish category; I hope you're right, of course.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

LarryAz — Fri, 11 May 2012 13:57:49 -0000

I kind of think that wishes are emotional. Therefore, I wish we could keep DD, but at the same time I would not wish for Jennings' departure. However, from a business standpoint I have to let DD go. I also have to get Jennings under contract before I could make any future decision on him. '12 will be a year that sorts out a lot of the roster controversies. I'm still counting on the fact that we have 48 out of the 90 guys who have not been thru a full camp yet; a lot, lot, lot of sorting out to do. I see a lot of unhappy fans when this is all settled and that first game is upon us.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

Larry — Fri, 11 May 2012 13:47:55 -0000

More than likely AR has 10 seasons left in him. Any high pick at QB would work out his contract and like Flynn move on. In fact two rookies would.

A tem can't afford to keep two highly regarded QB's past the rookie contract period. Thats why backups are veteran who have failed at starting, Vince Young, Brady Quinn, and every Cleveland, Buffalo and Chicago QB in the last 20 years or a young guy in his rookie contract like Flynn was.

That's why Philly traded Kolb when Vick got his deal. Schaub went to Houston and Brees left for N.O. (although the shoulder injury had a play as well.) Too much money on the bench.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

LarryAz — Fri, 11 May 2012 09:44:02 -0000

Seems to me that trading Jennings would be a way to get that high pick QB in '13. I think I recall that another first round QB sat on the Packer bench for a few years.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

Larry — Thu, 10 May 2012 14:53:20 -0000

Be careful what you wish for. At the money he will command for his next contract stranger things have happened although given the anticipated 2012 roster..what draft pick could possibly improve the Packer team enough.

A QB would be a waste, a RB would be under-utilized and the OL and Dline have plenty of high picks already. No thanks, I'll keep Jennings.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

LarryAz — Thu, 10 May 2012 13:46:05 -0000

Doesn't really matter anyway, Larry, you can't lose. The only reason expectations could be lower for BandG than Cobb is Cobb's draft position. Things being equal (per TT history) DD is out, BUT he is probably the most dependable in the role he is asked to peform. Who else would be content to be continually dropped on the depth chart (ie, Cobb, Nelson) and still perform like he does with no complaints. I like JJ, always have, BUT you're right he is the only one with trade value. Speaking of trade value, why not go all out if we're that great and deep at the position and TRADE Jennings. Talk about value ie; 2013 draft pick.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

Larry — Thu, 10 May 2012 13:02:57 -0000

Last comment on wide outs before I move on to DB's. The competition through August is between the 5 on the roster and the 4 who want to be on the roster. The Bears/Viking/Lion secondary has little to do with the eventual 53. The 5 on the roster are EXPECTED to beat the B/V/L's db's.

Strike one for DD is his age, and strike two is his position on the depth chart...someone equal or better gets his spot..that's life in the NFL.

The JJ scenario is certainly more problematic. He's more a protoypical NFL receiver, has decent production, is 27 and knows the system. BUT he has value in the league whereas Gurley and Borel are probably not tradable. Should both Borel and Gurley stand out, cutting one of them gets you nothing, trading JJ could be a 4th through 7th depending on the team.

I'm not saying I'm right, in fact odds are I'm wrong but it is an interesting scenario to at least a few of us!

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

LarryAz — Thu, 10 May 2012 12:43:56 -0000

Right on (I think). Can't find it, but I recall write ups regarding DET and CHI that they had lousy D backfields to begin with and they each lost their best cover guys at CB. MIN was just plain getting ancient with their best guys way over the hill.
To TT's credit its another place (DB) on our roster with depth, if not yet proven, again augmented with the most recent draft in both positions (CB and S)

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

Larry — Thu, 10 May 2012 07:24:24 -0000

Yep, I would too! BUT TC will tell us if MM will take Gurley and Borel over JJ and DD, I'm just sayin!

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

LarryAz — Wed, 09 May 2012 14:10:00 -0000

Its hard to explain why he was just beat out by a much slower guy (Herron) unless to situationally use Saine (like 3rd down). Even harder to explain when H was only a 6th rounder the year after he replaced Saine at OSU. H was a TD grinder, while S was a deep threat because of his speed and excellent hands. Hard to figure.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

Rick — Wed, 09 May 2012 11:31:06 -0000

5-6 great and good WRs helps dictate to other NFC North teams that the standard 2 DBs starters and 2 for depth won't cut it against Green Bay, so they must carry more DBs on their roster. So far The vikings and bears have been pathetic on the backend of their D and I would take JJ and DD against any of their #3 and #4 CB.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

Rick — Wed, 09 May 2012 11:30:58 -0000

I agree that Green Bay will be picked over by other teams from our castoffs and practice squad. Not much to do about it. in happened in 2010 and we won the Super Bowl, I can live with that :)

The OTAs, training camp and the first 2 preseason games will give MM a serious look at what each of the players can bring. Last year's rookie class never had as much of a run through so this will be a camp and preseason to watch. We have extra competition at LB, D line, and Safety. All areas of concern. We also have a great competition for WR, not an are of normal concern but in the pass happy NFL and one of the top QBs we need to make sure we have starter calibre from 1-6 in case of injuries. TEs will have to watch them selves because we may be only carrying 4 this year on the 53.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

LarryAz — Tue, 08 May 2012 13:01:36 -0000

First thing I do on the tube each morning is checkout NFL website. This morning (5/8) there were 21 teams mentioned with clips. NYG 11 times, WAS 6, DEN and NE 5, NYJ (Tebow, of course), MIN (stadium, what else?) and DAL 3, Colts-Saints(fines)-BUCS twice and finally Jags-Cin-Chargers-SF-RAMs-Eagles-SEA-MIA-Raiders-Panthers and Raiders all once. The team with the best record in '11 was not mentioned. I included Hargrove with the Saints. Amazing!

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

LarryAz — Tue, 08 May 2012 12:49:52 -0000

Don't see much to talk about re O since its the strength of the team obviously. I'm thinking we're covered at OT and RB. Green seems to be the key and why no push to get one in the draft. I like both Saine and Starks but I'm still remembering the film on Green that always blew me away. I find it hard to discuss the WRs with such a plethora on the roster.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

iccyfan — Tue, 08 May 2012 12:19:36 -0000

I just read the RB article on the main page, along with the comments at the end. Per those comments, Brandon Saine holds a class 100 meter dash record in the State of Ohio at 10.38 seconds. It'd certainly be nice to have a back with break-away speed! What's the knock on Saine? He didn't start full-time at OSU and was available as an UDFA. What is he lacking that keeps him off the field?

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

Larry — Tue, 08 May 2012 10:51:01 -0000

I like the comments on JJ, DD and others but the roster only holds 5 receivers tops (not including TE's). Given that Gurley and Borel were offered roster spots on other teams last year we're left with a problem.

TT and MM have kept youth over experience in many other positions...O-line, back-up QB, RB etc., DD obviously falls into that category but where talent is similar they tend to go youth. They're are plenty of teams in need of a young veteran receiver and more will surface as injuries arise.

Can we protect Gurley and Borel on the PS, I doubt it. Probably Moss can end up there if his preseason is limited and he's worth the spot, who knows at this point (he's gotta be really raw). Given Jennings contract year is next year and DD will be 38 or close (I think) we REALLY need to see these players THIS YEAR. I don't believe the PS is a viable option and we surely need to know who can step up.

Frankly we leave out Finley in the discussion and he lines up at X, Y and Z also... I believe that as TC comes to close, and Gurley and Borel have shown potential to make the roster, the logical choice is to move on with these young guys and trade JJ and cut DD.

As a last comment, the league now has two more X-packer personnel people or coaches with other teams (Oak, Miami) if there was a secret about the talent level of Gurley/Borel then the secret is out, IMO.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

BubbaOne — Tue, 08 May 2012 00:54:07 -0000

I felt JJ would give us the most value (vs the loss we would feel) in a trade to move up in the draft. Now that the draft is over I want him here. DD had a very good playoff game but was covered by a LB alot of the time. Putting Cobb in to replace him will put a lot more pressure on the D. I feel we can find a good WR out of the PS guys and the UDFA's.
Besides we need to groom a replacement for the possible loss of Jennings who will be a FA after the season.

Re: 4-3 Under and the Elephant Rusher…

Rick — Mon, 07 May 2012 21:29:24 -0000

By far JJ is better. He knows the offense and can stretch the field. As an X and Z receiver he is at his best. Jordy is better as the Y and Z and Jennings can do all three.

I lean towards keeping DD. We need all the weapons we can on offense. DD gets 3rd downs.

Jennings challenges top DBs. JJ can play out side opposite side of the field from Jennings and Jordy destroys people in the slot. DD comes in as a slot as well. Those 4 beat the top 4 DBs almost all the opponents have. Is DD expensive, a little, but he has a big value as well for Green Bay.