Packer Salary Cap (1 Viewer)

[sho nuff]

Seriously? Like real serious?I thought Samual was a pro-bowl CB. No? A much, much younger pro-bowl CB then the Harris character the Packers have on their roster. I even think most draft information I've read indicate that the Packers need a CB. Better hope like hell the CB they draft pans out as Harris is about finished. With the $$$$ available the risk involved in drafting a young CB would be completely eliminated by being pro-active and getting a proven, young, pro-bowl CB in Samual. I actually thought Philly had two pro-bowl type CB's on their roster and they still went out and got Samual. The NFL does seem to have a lot of teams that throw the ball. No?I even remember that Derek Anderson had preliminary thoughts of becoming a free agent. I realize the Pack would have had to part with a couple picks, but the $$$$ was definitely available. They didn't have the opportunity to explore this option. Rewind a couple weeks and they could have made an educated decision whether they wanted to persue Anderson or not before he re-upped with the Browns.

Yes...Samuel is a pro-bowl corner. And you point?Yes...the Packers "need" a young CB to build depth and have someone ready to step in when Harris and Woodson are done. Not bring in a high priced FA to put one of them on the bench. That is just dumb.And with Rodgers waiting...why give up picks and $$$ to a QB who has had one decent year with Anderson? Another dumb move.

Aren't the Packers picking late 20ish? I'd say that makes those picks expendable for some good insurance at the most important position on the field. There is much worse things to have then two QB's competing for the starting job with at least one having some decent success in the NFL. The fact is, they weren't even given the chance to go in this direction. At this point, they better hope like hell Rodgers isn't another one of Tedford's list of college QB's who fail miserably in the NFL.

So...trade away those picks...plus pretty much just piss on the 1st rounder and time they invested in Rodgers who knows the system and has been there for 3 years...for a QB who does not know McCarthy's system and his only body of work showed he falter later in the season?The fact is...people who know anything about the Packers and Ted Thompson know that direction would have never been looked at.What Tedford's other QBs have done is pretty irrelevant to what Rodgers might do in GB.

The fact that you think acquiring a young, pro-bowl QB (Anderson) is "pissing" away a 1st (late 20's pick) and a 3rd (late 3rd round) tells me the homer specs are on. It also tells me this disagreement could go on forever. I can understand your view if the team had a proven QB such as Brett Farve. Then giving away a 1st and 3rd for another pro-bowl QB would being "pissing" away the picks. Or if a team uses a 1st round pick on a QB when they already have a QB that has proven among the most durable players to ever play the game while still two or three years away from retirement as "pissing" away a pick. Those two things would be "pissing" away picks.As for Rodgers, he could be great although I think the chances of that are very slim. I completely disagree that you don't think a college system can mask player's weaknesses. It isn't coincidence that Tedford was involved in Joey Harrington, David Carr, and Akili Smith's accend into top three NFL, QB picks. The same can be said about Florida WR's under Spurrier. Hell you can already include Spurrier WR's at South Carolina (Troy Williamson).These QB's with any success don't grow on trees. At this point in the game, the list provided above is what is left at the QB position. Had this decision been made, which in all honesty is a very simple decision, a few weeks ago, the Packers could have turned a weekness into a strength by having both Anderson and Rodgers.We all know that playing professional sports is just that. A profession. The players tell that to us all the time when they get paid tons of cash. IT'S NOT A GAME. IT'S A PROFESSION. That said, many people right here in this great country have a profession. Doctors, lawyers, etc, etc. I just don't understand how the choice to retire or not is so damn hard. It's not like he has never been through the process of preparing for a season and playing a season in the NFL. Nothing going forward was going to change after they lost in the NFC Championship game. The decision should have been made quite a while ago in his mind. It's not that difficult when it's the same thing over and over. There is nothing unknown to create such difficulty in the decision making process.

Actually I said they would be pissing on Aaron Rodgers by making that move. The fact that you can't read makes me wonder even more about you.As for how is it this hard.He is giving up something he has done nearly all of his life. And in Green Bay for the past 17 years. This is not something anyone should do quickly.

 

[grind]

I’m not saying Anderson is a sure thing. In his defense though, four of his last six games were played in very bad weather. Even the likes of Tom Brady struggled in 40 mph winds and bad weather. It happens in the Midwest. The fact is, it was Anderson’s first year and he made the pro-bowl. That is a pretty good start.

All in all, I’m not saying the Packers definitely should have persued Anderson or Samual or anyone else. I’m saying two things. (1) For the life of me, I can’t understand how it can be so hard deciding to retire from your profession or not to retire. I’ve never played in the NFL, but I’d have to think that for the most part, pre-season camps, training camps, weekly season routines, etc, etc, are all very consistant from year to year. Either you want to go through the rigors or you don’t. It’s that simple. It’s not like he might run out of money, if he retires too soon. (2) How Packer fans can possibily think that it was BETTER that Farve waited until two weeks into free agency rather then two weeks prior to free agency to make this easy decision. I don’t see how it is BETTER to enter free agency with a pro-bowl QB, miss out on a potential opportunity to take a chance on another pro-bowl QB, and then two weeks later find out you don’t have any pro-bowl QB. How is that BETTER?

Obviously when a person is a fan of a team and player, their perspective of situations can be blurred. I understand that as a fan of sports. I actually LOVE Brett Farve. I think he was so fun to watch play and I think I'll miss the opportunity going forward.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

"Favre," thanks.

 

[Challenge Everything]

(1) For the life of me, I can’t understand how it can be so hard deciding to retire from your profession or not to retire. I’ve never played in the NFL, but I’d have to think that for the most part, pre-season camps, training camps, weekly season routines, etc, etc, are all very consistant from year to year. Either you want to go through the rigors or you don’t. It’s that simple. It’s not like he might run out of money, if he retires too soon. (2) How Packer fans can possibily think that it was BETTER that Farve waited until two weeks into free agency rather then two weeks prior to free agency to make this easy decision. I don’t see how it is BETTER to enter free agency with a pro-bowl QB, miss out on a potential opportunity to take a chance on another pro-bowl QB, and then two weeks later find out you don’t have any pro-bowl QB. How is that BETTER?

Favre has been playing football for more than his NFL career. The guy started at 4-5 years old with his dad in the back yard... went onto Pee-Wee and has not had one off season off since that time. I don't understand how retirement could be an easy decision for him. Especially having the year he did as well as the players around him, although there are only a couple that Favre can relate to now. And, it is pretty naive to think that training camps, pre-season camps, etc., are all similar from year to year and from coach to coach. And, it is not about the money.Yeah, it is better that Favre waited... it does not matter that Free Agency began or did not begin. That aspect does not matter when making a life altering decision that will affect his past ~30 years of life. I did not mind if he waited until now, later or sooner. The guy deserved to make a decision when he was comfortable making the decision... Free Agency is a byproduct of the game and no matter when that starts that is not going to put any weight on any decision a player makes. Many people have retired during Free Agency so Favre's decision should not be looked down on for when he made it.

 

[Pipes]

I’m not saying Anderson is a sure thing. In his defense though, four of his last six games were played in very bad weather. Even the likes of Tom Brady struggled in 40 mph winds and bad weather. It happens in the Midwest. The fact is, it was Anderson’s first year and he made the pro-bowl. That is a pretty good start.

All in all, I’m not saying the Packers definitely should have persued Anderson or Samual or anyone else. I’m saying two things. (1) For the life of me, I can’t understand how it can be so hard deciding to retire from your profession or not to retire. I’ve never played in the NFL, but I’d have to think that for the most part, pre-season camps, training camps, weekly season routines, etc, etc, are all very consistant from year to year. Either you want to go through the rigors or you don’t. It’s that simple. It’s not like he might run out of money, if he retires too soon. (2) How Packer fans can possibily think that it was BETTER that Farve waited until two weeks into free agency rather then two weeks prior to free agency to make this easy decision. I don’t see how it is BETTER to enter free agency with a pro-bowl QB, miss out on a potential opportunity to take a chance on another pro-bowl QB, and then two weeks later find out you don’t have any pro-bowl QB. How is that BETTER?

Obviously when a person is a fan of a team and player, their perspective of situations can be blurred. I understand that as a fan of sports. I actually LOVE Brett Farve. I think he was so fun to watch play and I think I'll miss the opportunity going forward.

I think it's easy to understand. Honestly I think Favre deep down wants to play especially with the young talent the Packers have however the fire just isn't there anymore to deal with the rigors of an NFL starting QB. I think he was waiting for the fire to return and it just never did.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

I’m not saying Anderson is a sure thing. In his defense though, four of his last six games were played in very bad weather. Even the likes of Tom Brady struggled in 40 mph winds and bad weather. It happens in the Midwest. The fact is, it was Anderson’s first year and he made the pro-bowl. That is a pretty good start.All in all, I’m not saying the Packers definitely should have persued Anderson or Samual or anyone else. I’m saying two things. (1) For the life of me, I can’t understand how it can be so hard deciding to retire from your profession or not to retire. I’ve never played in the NFL, but I’d have to think that for the most part, pre-season camps, training camps, weekly season routines, etc, etc, are all very consistant from year to year. Either you want to go through the rigors or you don’t. It’s that simple. It’s not like he might run out of money, if he retires too soon. (2) How Packer fans can possibily think that it was BETTER that Farve waited until two weeks into free agency rather then two weeks prior to free agency to make this easy decision. I don’t see how it is BETTER to enter free agency with a pro-bowl QB, miss out on a potential opportunity to take a chance on another pro-bowl QB, and then two weeks later find out you don’t have any pro-bowl QB. How is that BETTER?Obviously when a person is a fan of a team and player, their perspective of situations can be blurred. I understand that as a fan of sports. I actually LOVE Brett Farve. I think he was so fun to watch play and I think I'll miss the opportunity going forward.

Your point is that Favre somehow hurt the team because he didn't announce his retirement a week ago? Because the Packers then would or could have rushed to sign someone like Derek Anderson or Assante Samuel in the first week of free agency? Really just a stunningly stupid point to try to argue in the context of Favre's retirement.

 

[grind]

I’m not saying Anderson is a sure thing. In his defense though, four of his last six games were played in very bad weather. Even the likes of Tom Brady struggled in 40 mph winds and bad weather. It happens in the Midwest. The fact is, it was Anderson’s first year and he made the pro-bowl. That is a pretty good start.

All in all, I’m not saying the Packers definitely should have persued Anderson or Samual or anyone else. I’m saying two things. (1) For the life of me, I can’t understand how it can be so hard deciding to retire from your profession or not to retire. I’ve never played in the NFL, but I’d have to think that for the most part, pre-season camps, training camps, weekly season routines, etc, etc, are all very consistant from year to year. Either you want to go through the rigors or you don’t. It’s that simple. It’s not like he might run out of money, if he retires too soon. (2) How Packer fans can possibily think that it was BETTER that Farve waited until two weeks into free agency rather then two weeks prior to free agency to make this easy decision. I don’t see how it is BETTER to enter free agency with a pro-bowl QB, miss out on a potential opportunity to take a chance on another pro-bowl QB, and then two weeks later find out you don’t have any pro-bowl QB. How is that BETTER?

Obviously when a person is a fan of a team and player, their perspective of situations can be blurred. I understand that as a fan of sports. I actually LOVE Brett Farve. I think he was so fun to watch play and I think I'll miss the opportunity going forward.

Your point is that Favre somehow hurt the team because he didn't announce his retirement a week ago? Because the Packers then would or could have rushed to sign someone like Derek Anderson or Assante Samuel in the first week of free agency? Really just a stunningly stupid point to try to argue in the context of Favre's retirement.

Well considering the QB position is by far the most important position on the field, I don't see how providing a team the opportunity to upgrade the position is "stunningly stupid". Now I suppose you are going to tell me that Derek Anderson isn't an upgrade on Aaron Rodgers. At that point, I will just have to find me some Packer Sunglasses and move on.I will finish here, but don't be surprised if I bump this thread say December 1, 2008. Ya'll feel free to do the same.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

Seriously? Like real serious?

I thought Samual was a pro-bowl CB. No? A much, much younger pro-bowl CB then the Harris character the Packers have on their roster. I even think most draft information I've read indicate that the Packers need a CB. Better hope like hell the CB they draft pans out as Harris is about finished. With the $$$$ available the risk involved in drafting a young CB would be completely eliminated by being pro-active and getting a proven, young, pro-bowl CB in Samual. I actually thought Philly had two pro-bowl type CB's on their roster and they still went out and got Samual. The NFL does seem to have a lot of teams that throw the ball. No?

I even remember that Derek Anderson had preliminary thoughts of becoming a free agent. I realize the Pack would have had to part with a couple picks, but the $$$$ was definitely available. They didn't have the opportunity to explore this option. Rewind a couple weeks and they could have made an educated decision whether they wanted to persue Anderson or not before he re-upped with the Browns.

Yes...Samuel is a pro-bowl corner. And you point?Yes...the Packers "need" a young CB to build depth and have someone ready to step in when Harris and Woodson are done. Not bring in a high priced FA to put one of them on the bench. That is just dumb.

And with Rodgers waiting...why give up picks and $$$ to a QB who has had one decent year with Anderson? Another dumb move.

Aren't the Packers picking late 20ish? I'd say that makes those picks expendable for some good insurance at the most important position on the field. There is much worse things to have then two QB's competing for the starting job with at least one having some decent success in the NFL. The fact is, they weren't even given the chance to go in this direction. At this point, they better hope like hell Rodgers isn't another one of Tedford's list of college QB's who fail miserably in the NFL.

I found this intersting in regards to the Rodgers/Anderson talk:http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=724776

The NFC personnel man said he'd take Rodgers over other young quarterbacks such as Cleveland's Derek Anderson, San Francisco's Alex Smith, Arizona's Matt Leinart, Minnesota's Tarvaris Jackson, Buffalo's Trent Edwards and J.P. Losman, the New York Jets' Kellen Clemens, Miami's John Beck and Chicago's Rex Grossman.

The scout said he'd take Denver's Jay Cutler and Tennessee's Vince Young over Rodgers.

"He's probably a top-20 guy," the personnel man said. "Why would they be worried about Rodgers? When he's healthy, he's performed in excellent fashion. The problem is he hasn't played to say he's the guy."

 

[grind]

Seriously? Like real serious?

I thought Samual was a pro-bowl CB. No? A much, much younger pro-bowl CB then the Harris character the Packers have on their roster. I even think most draft information I've read indicate that the Packers need a CB. Better hope like hell the CB they draft pans out as Harris is about finished. With the $$$$ available the risk involved in drafting a young CB would be completely eliminated by being pro-active and getting a proven, young, pro-bowl CB in Samual. I actually thought Philly had two pro-bowl type CB's on their roster and they still went out and got Samual. The NFL does seem to have a lot of teams that throw the ball. No?

I even remember that Derek Anderson had preliminary thoughts of becoming a free agent. I realize the Pack would have had to part with a couple picks, but the $$$$ was definitely available. They didn't have the opportunity to explore this option. Rewind a couple weeks and they could have made an educated decision whether they wanted to persue Anderson or not before he re-upped with the Browns.

Yes...Samuel is a pro-bowl corner. And you point?Yes...the Packers "need" a young CB to build depth and have someone ready to step in when Harris and Woodson are done. Not bring in a high priced FA to put one of them on the bench. That is just dumb.

And with Rodgers waiting...why give up picks and $$$ to a QB who has had one decent year with Anderson? Another dumb move.

Aren't the Packers picking late 20ish? I'd say that makes those picks expendable for some good insurance at the most important position on the field. There is much worse things to have then two QB's competing for the starting job with at least one having some decent success in the NFL. The fact is, they weren't even given the chance to go in this direction. At this point, they better hope like hell Rodgers isn't another one of Tedford's list of college QB's who fail miserably in the NFL.

I found this intersting in regards to the Rodgers/Anderson talk:http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=724776

The NFC personnel man said he'd take Rodgers over other young quarterbacks such as Cleveland's Derek Anderson, San Francisco's Alex Smith, Arizona's Matt Leinart, Minnesota's Tarvaris Jackson, Buffalo's Trent Edwards and J.P. Losman, the New York Jets' Kellen Clemens, Miami's John Beck and Chicago's Rex Grossman.

The scout said he'd take Denver's Jay Cutler and Tennessee's Vince Young over Rodgers.

"He's probably a top-20 guy," the personnel man said. "Why would they be worried about Rodgers? When he's healthy, he's performed in excellent fashion. The problem is he hasn't played to say he's the guy."

We could argue this all day. Like I said, lets wait. Feel free to bump this Dec. 1st or whenever appropriate. I will do the same.I will say that there are a ton of scouts. I'm sure there are a few that will tell you exactly what you just posted. Considering the source of this information is a Milwaukee newspaper, I'm not surprised. Find the right scout, get a quote, print it. Anyone remember draft day when Rodgers was available?

 

[Max Power]

not sure if this was already posted....

The Packers may be interested in Quinn Gray as new QB Aaron Rodgers' backup.

The team showed interest in Gray a few weeks ago, and he likely moves back to the top of the list after Brett Favre's retirement. Gray's elongated release may be scaring teams off, but coach Mike McCarthy has worked well with quarterbacks.

Source: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

 

[scrumptrulescent]

Seriously? Like real serious?

I thought Samual was a pro-bowl CB. No? A much, much younger pro-bowl CB then the Harris character the Packers have on their roster. I even think most draft information I've read indicate that the Packers need a CB. Better hope like hell the CB they draft pans out as Harris is about finished. With the $$$$ available the risk involved in drafting a young CB would be completely eliminated by being pro-active and getting a proven, young, pro-bowl CB in Samual. I actually thought Philly had two pro-bowl type CB's on their roster and they still went out and got Samual. The NFL does seem to have a lot of teams that throw the ball. No?

I even remember that Derek Anderson had preliminary thoughts of becoming a free agent. I realize the Pack would have had to part with a couple picks, but the $$$$ was definitely available. They didn't have the opportunity to explore this option. Rewind a couple weeks and they could have made an educated decision whether they wanted to persue Anderson or not before he re-upped with the Browns.

Yes...Samuel is a pro-bowl corner. And you point?Yes...the Packers "need" a young CB to build depth and have someone ready to step in when Harris and Woodson are done. Not bring in a high priced FA to put one of them on the bench. That is just dumb.

And with Rodgers waiting...why give up picks and $$$ to a QB who has had one decent year with Anderson? Another dumb move.

Aren't the Packers picking late 20ish? I'd say that makes those picks expendable for some good insurance at the most important position on the field. There is much worse things to have then two QB's competing for the starting job with at least one having some decent success in the NFL. The fact is, they weren't even given the chance to go in this direction. At this point, they better hope like hell Rodgers isn't another one of Tedford's list of college QB's who fail miserably in the NFL.

I found this intersting in regards to the Rodgers/Anderson talk:http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=724776

The NFC personnel man said he'd take Rodgers over other young quarterbacks such as Cleveland's Derek Anderson, San Francisco's Alex Smith, Arizona's Matt Leinart, Minnesota's Tarvaris Jackson, Buffalo's Trent Edwards and J.P. Losman, the New York Jets' Kellen Clemens, Miami's John Beck and Chicago's Rex Grossman.

The scout said he'd take Denver's Jay Cutler and Tennessee's Vince Young over Rodgers.

"He's probably a top-20 guy," the personnel man said. "Why would they be worried about Rodgers? When he's healthy, he's performed in excellent fashion. The problem is he hasn't played to say he's the guy."

We could argue this all day. Like I said, lets wait. Feel free to bump this Dec. 1st or whenever appropriate. I will do the same.I will say that there are a ton of scouts. I'm sure there are a few that will tell you exactly what you just posted. Considering the source of this information is a Milwaukee newspaper, I'm not surprised. Find the right scout, get a quote, print it. Anyone remember draft day when Rodgers was available?

Anybody remember draft day (day 2) when Tom Brady was available?

 

[CletiusMaximus]

I’m not saying Anderson is a sure thing. In his defense though, four of his last six games were played in very bad weather. Even the likes of Tom Brady struggled in 40 mph winds and bad weather. It happens in the Midwest. The fact is, it was Anderson’s first year and he made the pro-bowl. That is a pretty good start.

All in all, I’m not saying the Packers definitely should have persued Anderson or Samual or anyone else. I’m saying two things. (1) For the life of me, I can’t understand how it can be so hard deciding to retire from your profession or not to retire. I’ve never played in the NFL, but I’d have to think that for the most part, pre-season camps, training camps, weekly season routines, etc, etc, are all very consistant from year to year. Either you want to go through the rigors or you don’t. It’s that simple. It’s not like he might run out of money, if he retires too soon. (2) How Packer fans can possibily think that it was BETTER that Farve waited until two weeks into free agency rather then two weeks prior to free agency to make this easy decision. I don’t see how it is BETTER to enter free agency with a pro-bowl QB, miss out on a potential opportunity to take a chance on another pro-bowl QB, and then two weeks later find out you don’t have any pro-bowl QB. How is that BETTER?

Obviously when a person is a fan of a team and player, their perspective of situations can be blurred. I understand that as a fan of sports. I actually LOVE Brett Farve. I think he was so fun to watch play and I think I'll miss the opportunity going forward.

Your point is that Favre somehow hurt the team because he didn't announce his retirement a week ago? Because the Packers then would or could have rushed to sign someone like Derek Anderson or Assante Samuel in the first week of free agency? Really just a stunningly stupid point to try to argue in the context of Favre's retirement.

Well considering the QB position is by far the most important position on the field, I don't see how providing a team the opportunity to upgrade the position is "stunningly stupid". Now I suppose you are going to tell me that Derek Anderson isn't an upgrade on Aaron Rodgers. At that point, I will just have to find me some Packer Sunglasses and move on.I will finish here, but don't be surprised if I bump this thread say December 1, 2008. Ya'll feel free to do the same.

I just don't get your point and it seems clear you are grasping for something to be critical of. Your criticism requires two huge assumptions but neither has any basis or merit: 1) that Favre somehow knew or could or should have known that he wanted to retire several weeks ago but negleted to inform the team out of spite or carelessness or some other inexplicable motivation; and, 2) that Packer management, caught unprepared by this annoucement, would have rushed into a bidding war for Derek Anderson (or Brian Griese perhaps?; Cleo Lemon?) in the first few days of free agency.

 

[a_rackowski]

THey should wait it out and get Chad Pennington or just trade for him outright. The Jets cant afford him right now to be a backup. A Veteran QB is what GB needs behind A Rodgers. The Brainpower of the 2 QBs combined might be the highest in football.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

The Packers likely won't make much of an impact in 2008 without Farve at the helm anyways. This is probably a good example of where salary cap manipulation through unachievable incentives would pay off for the franchise in the long-run. Give Kampman a $5 million dollar bonus for catching 10 TD passes in 2008 and, when he doesn't achieve it, take the extra cap room for some big free agency signings in 2009 after Rodgers has a year of experience.

I think Rodgers is going to surprise people. McCarthy will design the playcalling to take advantage of Rodgers skills.

Does Rodgers have skills? All Tedford QB's suck in the NFL.

He looked pretty good against the Cowboys last year though noone knows for sure. I think Rodgers will be decent but I'm more concerned about his durability than his ability. Rodgers has proven to be somewhat fragile during his limited playing time. Hopefully those were fluke injuries...I guess we'll find out soon enough.

Like the cowboys game...I think the sample size is too limited to say he will be decent or will be fragile.

He has been hurt twice already in his very limited playing career.

 

[Akkum]

I’m not saying Anderson is a sure thing. In his defense though, four of his last six games were played in very bad weather. Even the likes of Tom Brady struggled in 40 mph winds and bad weather. It happens in the Midwest. The fact is, it was Anderson’s first year and he made the pro-bowl. That is a pretty good start.

All in all, I’m not saying the Packers definitely should have persued Anderson or Samual or anyone else. I’m saying two things. (1) For the life of me, I can’t understand how it can be so hard deciding to retire from your profession or not to retire. I’ve never played in the NFL, but I’d have to think that for the most part, pre-season camps, training camps, weekly season routines, etc, etc, are all very consistant from year to year. Either you want to go through the rigors or you don’t. It’s that simple. It’s not like he might run out of money, if he retires too soon. (2) How Packer fans can possibily think that it was BETTER that Farve waited until two weeks into free agency rather then two weeks prior to free agency to make this easy decision. I don’t see how it is BETTER to enter free agency with a pro-bowl QB, miss out on a potential opportunity to take a chance on another pro-bowl QB, and then two weeks later find out you don’t have any pro-bowl QB. How is that BETTER?

Obviously when a person is a fan of a team and player, their perspective of situations can be blurred. I understand that as a fan of sports. I actually LOVE Brett Farve. I think he was so fun to watch play and I think I'll miss the opportunity going forward.

Your point is that Favre somehow hurt the team because he didn't announce his retirement a week ago? Because the Packers then would or could have rushed to sign someone like Derek Anderson or Assante Samuel in the first week of free agency? Really just a stunningly stupid point to try to argue in the context of Favre's retirement.

Well considering the QB position is by far the most important position on the field, I don't see how providing a team the opportunity to upgrade the position is "stunningly stupid". Now I suppose you are going to tell me that Derek Anderson isn't an upgrade on Aaron Rodgers. At that point, I will just have to find me some Packer Sunglasses and move on.I will finish here, but don't be surprised if I bump this thread say December 1, 2008. Ya'll feel free to do the same.

Since this thread is going to bet a bump on December 1, 2008. My prediction, Derek Anderson will not be the starter for the Browns...Brady Quinn will be....

 

[grind]

Seriously? Like real serious?

I thought Samual was a pro-bowl CB. No? A much, much younger pro-bowl CB then the Harris character the Packers have on their roster. I even think most draft information I've read indicate that the Packers need a CB. Better hope like hell the CB they draft pans out as Harris is about finished. With the $$$$ available the risk involved in drafting a young CB would be completely eliminated by being pro-active and getting a proven, young, pro-bowl CB in Samual. I actually thought Philly had two pro-bowl type CB's on their roster and they still went out and got Samual. The NFL does seem to have a lot of teams that throw the ball. No?

I even remember that Derek Anderson had preliminary thoughts of becoming a free agent. I realize the Pack would have had to part with a couple picks, but the $$$$ was definitely available. They didn't have the opportunity to explore this option. Rewind a couple weeks and they could have made an educated decision whether they wanted to persue Anderson or not before he re-upped with the Browns.

Yes...Samuel is a pro-bowl corner. And you point?Yes...the Packers "need" a young CB to build depth and have someone ready to step in when Harris and Woodson are done. Not bring in a high priced FA to put one of them on the bench. That is just dumb.

And with Rodgers waiting...why give up picks and $$$ to a QB who has had one decent year with Anderson? Another dumb move.

Aren't the Packers picking late 20ish? I'd say that makes those picks expendable for some good insurance at the most important position on the field. There is much worse things to have then two QB's competing for the starting job with at least one having some decent success in the NFL. The fact is, they weren't even given the chance to go in this direction. At this point, they better hope like hell Rodgers isn't another one of Tedford's list of college QB's who fail miserably in the NFL.

I found this intersting in regards to the Rodgers/Anderson talk:http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=724776

The NFC personnel man said he'd take Rodgers over other young quarterbacks such as Cleveland's Derek Anderson, San Francisco's Alex Smith, Arizona's Matt Leinart, Minnesota's Tarvaris Jackson, Buffalo's Trent Edwards and J.P. Losman, the New York Jets' Kellen Clemens, Miami's John Beck and Chicago's Rex Grossman.

The scout said he'd take Denver's Jay Cutler and Tennessee's Vince Young over Rodgers.

"He's probably a top-20 guy," the personnel man said. "Why would they be worried about Rodgers? When he's healthy, he's performed in excellent fashion. The problem is he hasn't played to say he's the guy."

We could argue this all day. Like I said, lets wait. Feel free to bump this Dec. 1st or whenever appropriate. I will do the same.I will say that there are a ton of scouts. I'm sure there are a few that will tell you exactly what you just posted. Considering the source of this information is a Milwaukee newspaper, I'm not surprised. Find the right scout, get a quote, print it. Anyone remember draft day when Rodgers was available?

Anybody remember draft day (day 2) when Tom Brady was available?

This comment is exactly right as it relates to a couple years ago when the Packers took Rodgers when they had Farve in the stable. At the time Brady was drafted, the Patriots had the proven Drew Bledsoe. Addressing the QB position in the 6th round made a ton of sense for the Patriots. Fortunate for them, the struck gold with Brady. Was Rodgers a 6th round pick?

 

[sho nuff]

I’m not saying Anderson is a sure thing. In his defense though, four of his last six games were played in very bad weather. Even the likes of Tom Brady struggled in 40 mph winds and bad weather. It happens in the Midwest. The fact is, it was Anderson’s first year and he made the pro-bowl. That is a pretty good start.All in all, I’m not saying the Packers definitely should have persued Anderson or Samual or anyone else. I’m saying two things. (1) For the life of me, I can’t understand how it can be so hard deciding to retire from your profession or not to retire. I’ve never played in the NFL, but I’d have to think that for the most part, pre-season camps, training camps, weekly season routines, etc, etc, are all very consistant from year to year. Either you want to go through the rigors or you don’t. It’s that simple. It’s not like he might run out of money, if he retires too soon. (2) How Packer fans can possibily think that it was BETTER that Farve waited until two weeks into free agency rather then two weeks prior to free agency to make this easy decision. I don’t see how it is BETTER to enter free agency with a pro-bowl QB, miss out on a potential opportunity to take a chance on another pro-bowl QB, and then two weeks later find out you don’t have any pro-bowl QB. How is that BETTER?Obviously when a person is a fan of a team and player, their perspective of situations can be blurred. I understand that as a fan of sports. I actually LOVE Brett Farve. I think he was so fun to watch play and I think I'll miss the opportunity going forward.

A. Retiring from something you have done and enjoyed almost your entire life is not like retiring from a job most people hate. Yes...all of the camp and practices are hard...but it leads up to doing something he loved...playing on Sundays.B. 2 weeks into free agency? Try about what...4-5 days? It started last Friday. The reason I don't think it was a big deal because there were no free agents the Packers were going to bring in. They drafted Rodgers to be their QB after Favre. They spent a 1st round pick on him...and time developing him for the past 3 years. They were not going to trade and spend on a free agent QB like Anderson. It just was not going to happen. I find it far more absurd that the 3 names you brought up now were Samuel, Moss, and Anderson. 3 positions the team was not going to go out and make any big moves for. It shows a complete lack of understanding of what the Packers needs are...and how their GM works.

 

[sho nuff]

I’m not saying Anderson is a sure thing. In his defense though, four of his last six games were played in very bad weather. Even the likes of Tom Brady struggled in 40 mph winds and bad weather. It happens in the Midwest. The fact is, it was Anderson’s first year and he made the pro-bowl. That is a pretty good start.

All in all, I’m not saying the Packers definitely should have persued Anderson or Samual or anyone else. I’m saying two things. (1) For the life of me, I can’t understand how it can be so hard deciding to retire from your profession or not to retire. I’ve never played in the NFL, but I’d have to think that for the most part, pre-season camps, training camps, weekly season routines, etc, etc, are all very consistant from year to year. Either you want to go through the rigors or you don’t. It’s that simple. It’s not like he might run out of money, if he retires too soon. (2) How Packer fans can possibily think that it was BETTER that Farve waited until two weeks into free agency rather then two weeks prior to free agency to make this easy decision. I don’t see how it is BETTER to enter free agency with a pro-bowl QB, miss out on a potential opportunity to take a chance on another pro-bowl QB, and then two weeks later find out you don’t have any pro-bowl QB. How is that BETTER?

Obviously when a person is a fan of a team and player, their perspective of situations can be blurred. I understand that as a fan of sports. I actually LOVE Brett Farve. I think he was so fun to watch play and I think I'll miss the opportunity going forward.

Your point is that Favre somehow hurt the team because he didn't announce his retirement a week ago? Because the Packers then would or could have rushed to sign someone like Derek Anderson or Assante Samuel in the first week of free agency? Really just a stunningly stupid point to try to argue in the context of Favre's retirement.

Well considering the QB position is by far the most important position on the field, I don't see how providing a team the opportunity to upgrade the position is "stunningly stupid". Now I suppose you are going to tell me that Derek Anderson isn't an upgrade on Aaron Rodgers. At that point, I will just have to find me some Packer Sunglasses and move on.I will finish here, but don't be surprised if I bump this thread say December 1, 2008. Ya'll feel free to do the same.

Its stuningly stupid because Aaron Rodgers is the QB of the future for the Packers...and most sane people realized that no matter what Favre did or when he announced...the Packers and Ted Thompson were not going to make a move for Derek Anderson.Im going to tell you that Anderson is more known as to what he can do. Does that mean he is a good fit for GB or an upgraded to Rodgers? NOPE.

Bump this thread why? Because Anderson is doing well for a pretty good Cleveland team and Rodgers might not be doing as well? Will not make you right. Thompson was never going to do it.

 

[sho nuff]

THey should wait it out and get Chad Pennington or just trade for him outright. The Jets cant afford him right now to be a backup. A Veteran QB is what GB needs behind A Rodgers. The Brainpower of the 2 QBs combined might be the highest in football.

I thought about that...but after Favre...I don't think I could ever watch and wait 5 seconds for Pennington's pass to get to Driver on a 5 yard out.

 

[sho nuff]

The Packers likely won't make much of an impact in 2008 without Farve at the helm anyways. This is probably a good example of where salary cap manipulation through unachievable incentives would pay off for the franchise in the long-run. Give Kampman a $5 million dollar bonus for catching 10 TD passes in 2008 and, when he doesn't achieve it, take the extra cap room for some big free agency signings in 2009 after Rodgers has a year of experience.

I think Rodgers is going to surprise people. McCarthy will design the playcalling to take advantage of Rodgers skills.

Does Rodgers have skills? All Tedford QB's suck in the NFL.

He looked pretty good against the Cowboys last year though noone knows for sure. I think Rodgers will be decent but I'm more concerned about his durability than his ability. Rodgers has proven to be somewhat fragile during his limited playing time. Hopefully those were fluke injuries...I guess we'll find out soon enough.

Like the cowboys game...I think the sample size is too limited to say he will be decent or will be fragile.

He has been hurt twice already in his very limited playing career.

Yes...how many QBs got hurt last year?The year before?Anyone will look fragile after #4.But I just don't think we know enough yet to really call him fragile.Its a question mark...but not a worry to me.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

The Packers likely won't make much of an impact in 2008 without Farve at the helm anyways. This is probably a good example of where salary cap manipulation through unachievable incentives would pay off for the franchise in the long-run. Give Kampman a $5 million dollar bonus for catching 10 TD passes in 2008 and, when he doesn't achieve it, take the extra cap room for some big free agency signings in 2009 after Rodgers has a year of experience.

I think Rodgers is going to surprise people. McCarthy will design the playcalling to take advantage of Rodgers skills.

Does Rodgers have skills? All Tedford QB's suck in the NFL.

He looked pretty good against the Cowboys last year though noone knows for sure. I think Rodgers will be decent but I'm more concerned about his durability than his ability. Rodgers has proven to be somewhat fragile during his limited playing time. Hopefully those were fluke injuries...I guess we'll find out soon enough.

Like the cowboys game...I think the sample size is too limited to say he will be decent or will be fragile.

He has been hurt twice already in his very limited playing career.

Yes...how many QBs got hurt last year?The year before?Anyone will look fragile after #4.But I just don't think we know enough yet to really call him fragile.Its a question mark...but not a worry to me.

He broke his ankle and then last year after his game vs Dallas was unable to go the next week because of a groin or hamstring. So in limited playing time he has been hurt twice.

 

[BelichicksRevenge]

That is flat out scary that a Top 3 team in the NFC is 35 million under the cap. I understand they do not have Favre anymore, but for 35 million, they could resurrect Johnny Unitas...

It would've been scarier at the START of free agency.

Why...who did they actually miss out on?Its scary from the standpoint that they should not lose any of their own core players and can sign several others if they feel like it.

Ummmm...for starters, I think there was this Samual character that was available. Some guy named Moss was also available. Do you want me to continue?

Sure...try continuing without naming 2 players the Packers were not going to try and sign with or without Favre.Lets see...Corner...why pay that much when they are already heavily invested in Harris and Woodson?

Moss? He was not coming. Again, WR not really a position of weakness.

Those are 2 positions the Packers are pretty much set at. Sure, Samuel is younger...but they are not putting Woodson or Harris as a nickel back only.

and Moss showed he still had some left in him...but is that really what they need? Did he put NE over the top?

Other than Harrison and maybe Bruce (from St.L). Can you name for me the stud WRs of the past 10 or so SB champs?

It takes more than one great WR to win it all...

Last I checked, Moss is a professional athlete. He would have left N.E. for the right price. You'd have to be a fool to think he'd turn down cold, hard cash to stay in N.E.So Harris couldn't be cut or sent to the pine for a much younger CB in Samual? How many years does Harris (or Woodson) have left? It's called being pro-active. Now if you say Samual isn't good or worth the $$$$ he was getting on the market, so be it. The basis of this discussion is the fact that the Packers have a ton of $$$$$$ and that cash could have been available prior to free agency.

If so, they would have at least had the option to look into acquiring Samual (cutting Harris) and buying Moss for a couple/three years.

He was offered more from Philly and turned that down.He is a pro...but he wants to win it all. Unless they completely overpaid for him...he was not coming to GB with Rodgers at the helm.

Cut Harris? You are going to have them cut or bench a pro-bowl corner so that they can overpay for Asante Samuel? I am so glad Ted Thompson is the GM and not you.

The basis for discussion is the fact that the free agent pool is not that talented this season in positions the Packers actually have some need.

CB and WR are not positions of need and any team that would cut a pro-bowl CB would be idiotic.

This might seriously be the dumbest thing I have ever read on this board.

Seriously? Like real serious?I thought Samual was a pro-bowl CB. No? A much, much younger pro-bowl CB then the Harris character the Packers have on their roster. I even think most draft information I've read indicate that the Packers need a CB. Better hope like hell the CB they draft pans out as Harris is about finished. With the $$$$ available the risk involved in drafting a young CB would be completely eliminated by being pro-active and getting a proven, young, pro-bowl CB in Samual. I actually thought Philly had two pro-bowl type CB's on their roster and they still went out and got Samual. The NFL does seem to have a lot of teams that throw the ball. No?

I even remember that Derek Anderson had preliminary thoughts of becoming a free agent. I realize the Pack would have had to part with a couple picks, but the $$$$ was definitely available. They didn't have the opportunity to explore this option. Rewind a couple weeks and they could have made an educated decision whether they wanted to persue Anderson or not before he re-upped with the Browns.

The Packers will have money available to them next year as well. The advantage this gives the Packers is enormous. Being this far under the cap will allow them to front-load nearly all of their contracts (similar to the Woodson deal). They can now extend a player like Jennings giving him $15 million in the first year and then $3 million that next 4 and get the cap room back.

They would not be able to do something like that. There are salary cap rules that a contract like that would violate. They would have to count some of that initial 15 million as a bonus and it would be spread throughout the contract length.

 

[sho nuff]

The Packers likely won't make much of an impact in 2008 without Farve at the helm anyways. This is probably a good example of where salary cap manipulation through unachievable incentives would pay off for the franchise in the long-run. Give Kampman a $5 million dollar bonus for catching 10 TD passes in 2008 and, when he doesn't achieve it, take the extra cap room for some big free agency signings in 2009 after Rodgers has a year of experience.

I think Rodgers is going to surprise people. McCarthy will design the playcalling to take advantage of Rodgers skills.

Does Rodgers have skills? All Tedford QB's suck in the NFL.

He looked pretty good against the Cowboys last year though noone knows for sure. I think Rodgers will be decent but I'm more concerned about his durability than his ability. Rodgers has proven to be somewhat fragile during his limited playing time. Hopefully those were fluke injuries...I guess we'll find out soon enough.

Like the cowboys game...I think the sample size is too limited to say he will be decent or will be fragile.

He has been hurt twice already in his very limited playing career.

Yes...how many QBs got hurt last year?The year before?Anyone will look fragile after #4.But I just don't think we know enough yet to really call him fragile.Its a question mark...but not a worry to me.

He broke his ankle and then last year after his game vs Dallas was unable to go the next week because of a groin or hamstring. So in limited playing time he has been hurt twice.

He broke a bone in his foot early in the 3rd quarter of a game against NE. And finished the game.He hurt his hammy in the tuesday practice after the Dallas game. Was out a few weeks and not rushed back...obviously because with Favre they did not need him to be.As I said...small sample size pretty much shows we don't have enough data to go on.If I pulled a sample of 50 items...but only looked at 2 of them...and those 2 had problems...I could not say all 50 would have problems. We simply don't have enough info yet is all I am saying.

 

[jurrassic]

That is flat out scary that a Top 3 team in the NFC is 35 million under the cap. I understand they do not have Favre anymore, but for 35 million, they could resurrect Johnny Unitas...

It would've been scarier at the START of free agency.

Why...who did they actually miss out on?Its scary from the standpoint that they should not lose any of their own core players and can sign several others if they feel like it.

Ummmm...for starters, I think there was this Samual character that was available. Some guy named Moss was also available. Do you want me to continue?

Sure...try continuing without naming 2 players the Packers were not going to try and sign with or without Favre.Lets see...Corner...why pay that much when they are already heavily invested in Harris and Woodson?

Moss? He was not coming. Again, WR not really a position of weakness.

Those are 2 positions the Packers are pretty much set at. Sure, Samuel is younger...but they are not putting Woodson or Harris as a nickel back only.

and Moss showed he still had some left in him...but is that really what they need? Did he put NE over the top?

Other than Harrison and maybe Bruce (from St.L). Can you name for me the stud WRs of the past 10 or so SB champs?

It takes more than one great WR to win it all...

Last I checked, Moss is a professional athlete. He would have left N.E. for the right price. You'd have to be a fool to think he'd turn down cold, hard cash to stay in N.E.So Harris couldn't be cut or sent to the pine for a much younger CB in Samual? How many years does Harris (or Woodson) have left? It's called being pro-active. Now if you say Samual isn't good or worth the $$$$ he was getting on the market, so be it. The basis of this discussion is the fact that the Packers have a ton of $$$$$$ and that cash could have been available prior to free agency.

If so, they would have at least had the option to look into acquiring Samual (cutting Harris) and buying Moss for a couple/three years.

He was offered more from Philly and turned that down.He is a pro...but he wants to win it all. Unless they completely overpaid for him...he was not coming to GB with Rodgers at the helm.

Cut Harris? You are going to have them cut or bench a pro-bowl corner so that they can overpay for Asante Samuel? I am so glad Ted Thompson is the GM and not you.

The basis for discussion is the fact that the free agent pool is not that talented this season in positions the Packers actually have some need.

CB and WR are not positions of need and any team that would cut a pro-bowl CB would be idiotic.

This might seriously be the dumbest thing I have ever read on this board.

Seriously? Like real serious?I thought Samual was a pro-bowl CB. No? A much, much younger pro-bowl CB then the Harris character the Packers have on their roster. I even think most draft information I've read indicate that the Packers need a CB. Better hope like hell the CB they draft pans out as Harris is about finished. With the $$$$ available the risk involved in drafting a young CB would be completely eliminated by being pro-active and getting a proven, young, pro-bowl CB in Samual. I actually thought Philly had two pro-bowl type CB's on their roster and they still went out and got Samual. The NFL does seem to have a lot of teams that throw the ball. No?

I even remember that Derek Anderson had preliminary thoughts of becoming a free agent. I realize the Pack would have had to part with a couple picks, but the $$$$ was definitely available. They didn't have the opportunity to explore this option. Rewind a couple weeks and they could have made an educated decision whether they wanted to persue Anderson or not before he re-upped with the Browns.

The Packers will have money available to them next year as well. The advantage this gives the Packers is enormous. Being this far under the cap will allow them to front-load nearly all of their contracts (similar to the Woodson deal). They can now extend a player like Jennings giving him $15 million in the first year and then $3 million that next 4 and get the cap room back.

They would not be able to do something like that. There are salary cap rules that a contract like that would violate. They would have to count some of that initial 15 million as a bonus and it would be spread throughout the contract length.

I don't know all of the restrictions/requirements in regards to the salary cap, but you can definitely front load contracts and guarantees. As Woodson recent contract proves. He signed a 7 year $52 million dollar deal with the Packers and was given $10.5 million in the first year with a $4 millon signing bonus. His cap numbers: 2007 $10.5, 2008 $3.25, 2009 $4 million. The numbers than go up 1/2 millon until the contract expires in 2013. Don't tell me it can't be done. It can be done, and could probably be even more creative with workout and roster bonuses.

 

[ookook]

What I think is most clear to me is that having Favre or not having Favre played absolutely NO ROLE in TT's free agency decisions.

Now, I personally am not so happy about that.

But it is just foolish to say the Packers would have done anything differently had they known two weeks earlier.

Although Sho Nuff will jump all over me, I think if they had used their twenty-some million to go after Crumpler and Wahle, and signed an extension to Williams instead of trading for a pick, Favre would likely be playing this year.

So for better or worse, I see no way knowing about his retirement would have mattered.

And there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY TT would have brought in a QB to compete for the job with Rogers. Rogers is his boy.

 

[sho nuff]

What I think is most clear to me is that having Favre or not having Favre played absolutely NO ROLE in TT's free agency decisions.Now, I personally am not so happy about that.But it is just foolish to say the Packers would have done anything differently had they known two weeks earlier.Although Sho Nuff will jump all over me, I think if they had used their twenty-some million to go after Crumpler and Wahle, and signed an extension to Williams instead of trading for a pick, Favre would likely be playing this year. So for better or worse, I see no way knowing about his retirement would have mattered.And there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY TT would have brought in a QB to compete for the job with Rogers. Rogers is his boy.

So...signing a TE coming off of a down year with injuries (who is not a blocking TE and may not add much above what they already have in Donald Lee)...resiging a DT who is at a position of strength with the team after drafting Harrell last year and the improvement of Jolly and Cole...and siging a guard who may not even fit into the zone blocking scheme would have made him come back?Again...I don't think Ted was going after any of them other than maybe Wahle no matter what Favre did or was going to do. They talked, I think with Wahle...but never got serious about the money.

 

[ookook]

I agree that TT was not going after them and that it was not contingent on what Favre did. I just think he should have.

I would not have replaced Lee with Crumpler, but used them both. It is Franks I would have sent packing. Please do not suggest that Lee is as good a TE as Crumpler as the data say otherwise.

Not sure what I would have done with Williams. It was a good move in the long run to get the 2nd, but TT is just way too fond of draft picks. But surely you must admit it did not help their chance to get to a Superbowl this year.

Don't get me started on Harrell, horrible pick.

 

[ookook]

So having Keith Jackson and Chmura was a bad thing?

 

[sho nuff]

I agree that TT was not going after them and that it was not contingent on what Favre did. I just think he should have.I would not have replaced Lee with Crumpler, but used them both. It is Franks I would have sent packing. Please do not suggest that Lee is as good a TE as Crumpler as the data say otherwise.Not sure what I would have done with Williams. It was a good move in the long run to get the 2nd, but TT is just way too fond of draft picks. But surely you must admit it did not help their chance to get to a Superbowl this year.Don't get me started on Harrell, horrible pick.

Franks was sent packing. But he is more of a blocking TE (which is what they need now with Lee being the receiving TE).I will suggest that Lee is as good a TE as Crumpler with Crumpler hurt. It remains to be seen how he comes back from it. I thought it might be nice if they went after him...but did not see it as a huge upgrade or a big need for the team.He got a 2nd for a guy drafted in like the 6th. A guy who I don't think is dominant enough to give 6 mil per season. He was in a rotation and really died off when it was more up to him down the stretch when Cole and Jolly were hurt.Harrell? Horrible pick? After one year people are going to say that? Too funny.

 

[scott72]

Don't get me started on Harrell, horrible pick.

Based on what? A few games in his first year? How many defensive lineman go nuts their first year? Give the guy a break and see what he does this year already.

 

[sho nuff]

So having Keith Jackson and Chmura was a bad thing?

Who ever claimed it was a bad thing?This is a different offense...a different team...and so on.Would Crumpler have put them over the top? Not so sure. Is it that big of a thing in McCarthy's offense to have a dominant TE? Again, not so sure.

 

[sho nuff]

Don't get me started on Harrell, horrible pick.

Based on what? A few games in his first year? How many defensive lineman go nuts their first year? Give the guy a break and see what he does this year already.

Bingo.Down the stretch I was damn glad they had him when Cole and Jolly were hurt.

 

[scott72]

Although Sho Nuff will jump all over me, I think if they had used their twenty-some million to go after Crumpler and Wahle, and signed an extension to Williams instead of trading for a pick, Favre would likely be playing this year.

I'm glad they didn't do any of these. Crump and Wahle are on the downside of their careers and Williams wasn't worth 6 mill and to get a 2nd for him is fantastic. I don't disagree with anything Ted did here with these guys and I don't think it had anything to do with Brett's decision.

 

[_4_]

Seriously? Like real serious?

I thought Samual was a pro-bowl CB. No? A much, much younger pro-bowl CB then the Harris character the Packers have on their roster. I even think most draft information I've read indicate that the Packers need a CB. Better hope like hell the CB they draft pans out as Harris is about finished. With the $$$$ available the risk involved in drafting a young CB would be completely eliminated by being pro-active and getting a proven, young, pro-bowl CB in Samual. I actually thought Philly had two pro-bowl type CB's on their roster and they still went out and got Samual. The NFL does seem to have a lot of teams that throw the ball. No?

I even remember that Derek Anderson had preliminary thoughts of becoming a free agent. I realize the Pack would have had to part with a couple picks, but the $$$$ was definitely available. They didn't have the opportunity to explore this option. Rewind a couple weeks and they could have made an educated decision whether they wanted to persue Anderson or not before he re-upped with the Browns.

Yes...Samuel is a pro-bowl corner. And you point?Yes...the Packers "need" a young CB to build depth and have someone ready to step in when Harris and Woodson are done. Not bring in a high priced FA to put one of them on the bench. That is just dumb.

And with Rodgers waiting...why give up picks and $$$ to a QB who has had one decent year with Anderson? Another dumb move.

Aren't the Packers picking late 20ish? I'd say that makes those picks expendable for some good insurance at the most important position on the field. There is much worse things to have then two QB's competing for the starting job with at least one having some decent success in the NFL. The fact is, they weren't even given the chance to go in this direction. At this point, they better hope like hell Rodgers isn't another one of Tedford's list of college QB's who fail miserably in the NFL.

I found this intersting in regards to the Rodgers/Anderson talk:http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=724776

The NFC personnel man said he'd take Rodgers over other young quarterbacks such as Cleveland's Derek Anderson, San Francisco's Alex Smith, Arizona's Matt Leinart, Minnesota's Tarvaris Jackson, Buffalo's Trent Edwards and J.P. Losman, the New York Jets' Kellen Clemens, Miami's John Beck and Chicago's Rex Grossman.

The scout said he'd take Denver's Jay Cutler and Tennessee's Vince Young over Rodgers.

"He's probably a top-20 guy," the personnel man said. "Why would they be worried about Rodgers? When he's healthy, he's performed in excellent fashion. The problem is he hasn't played to say he's the guy."

Very interesting perspective from "the personnel man". I've got my fingers crossed he is a personnel man with a solid QB or two nurtured personally....

 

[larry_boy_44]

That is flat out scary that a Top 3 team in the NFC is 35 million under the cap. I understand they do not have Favre anymore, but for 35 million, they could resurrect Johnny Unitas...

It would've been scarier at the START of free agency.

Why...who did they actually miss out on?Its scary from the standpoint that they should not lose any of their own core players and can sign several others if they feel like it.

Ummmm...for starters, I think there was this Samual character that was available. Some guy named Moss was also available. Do you want me to continue?

Why would the Packers pay a ton of money to pricey free agents at two of thier strongest positions? Do we need young CBs to take over Woodson & Harris' spots in a year or two? Yeah. But signing Samual would mean we'd have the highest paid nickelback in the league by a ton (no matter which of the 3 that ends up being)and we have Drive, Jennings, Jones, & Robinson. Is Moss better than them? Yeah. But we have other positions we can improve at before we look at WR...