Problems with salaries

dannobanano said:
And GB seems to be moving in the direction of “defense first”.
I think they understand you won’t find the next Favre/Rodgers for possibly a whole generation.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. It’s still a league where you need to score points to win. I would also add the addition of Dillion points in a more balanced approach on offense also
 
Cheesedog said:
It's a big issue. But how many top-tier and top-paid Qbs win superbowls these days? None. It's the good Qbs on mid-tier contracts or rookie deals. Unless you are Brady in which case you've made team-friendly salary deals to lower your cap.

Like it or not the way to win a SB is not to pay your QB a large % of your cap. It will win you plenty of division titles and reg season stats.. But if your goal is the Lombardi it doesn't work.
Click to expand...
Agree it's near impossible to win with a QB taking up large portion of cap. You have to make sure you are hitting HR's in the draft to fill other area's.
 
GBP4EVER said:
Agree it's near impossible to win with a QB taking up large portion of cap. You have to make sure you are hitting HR's in the draft to fill other area's.
Click to expand...
And since 2009, 12 different teams have won a Lombardi. So while the premise is valid, it’s even more difficult to win with a pedestrian QB. So pick your poison. Hell even maintaining a 3-4 year run to go deep in January is a challenge
 
FlaPack said:
And since 2009, 12 different teams have won a Lombardi. So while the premise is valid, it’s even more difficult to win with a pedestrian QB. So pick your poison. Hell even maintaining a 3-4 year run to go deep in January is a challenge
Click to expand...
Yes but I don't think you will win with a roster like GB were you have several players maing a ton and then having crappy depth to rely on because you can't afford better. I think last year the Rams was a fluke it's rare to have lot of good players on a team like that and win.
 
GBP4EVER said:
Yes but I don't think you will win with a roster like GB were you have several players maing a ton and then having crappy depth to rely on because you can't afford better. I think last year the Rams was a fluke it's rare to have lot of good players on a team like that and win.
Click to expand...
31 other teams have the exact same issues. It’s more how you manage cap / roster. For decades GB was cash out = cap, never kicked the can down the road, no void years and Packer nation screamed they did not go “all in”. Well they paid up for Rodgers, Bak, Alexander, Clark, added void years and sacrificed depth. Pick your poison. We will soon find out, if not having an elite QB in exchange for a above average defense keeps the ship right. And if at some point Alexander or Gary or Clark go down is there adequate depth, probably won’t be after they extend Gary
 
GBP4EVER said:
Yes but I don't think you will win with a roster like GB were you have several players maing a ton and then having crappy depth to rely on because you can't afford better. I think last year the Rams was a fluke it's rare to have lot of good players on a team like that and win.
Click to expand...
Lot of our depth is on rookie contracts. For now.
 
GBP4EVER said:
Yes but I don't think you will win with a roster like GB were you have several players maing a ton and then having crappy depth to rely on because you can't afford better. I think last year the Rams was a fluke it's rare to have lot of good players on a team like that and win.
Click to expand...

And actually the Rams only won the NFC title because of a dropped INT
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top