Rodgers, The Packers and Reality

Keg Man said:
Guys, it's not for Rodgers.

For fucks sake, he's just an asset.

AND, WE DIDN'T MAXIMIZE OUR ASSET.

Not sorry, emptied a couple places of High Lives
Click to expand...

I've never heard of an asset that is sentient, controls its own performance and sets its own monetary value. Which is to go back to the hill I will die on with this issue, that Rodgers is as much at fault for not winning more SB than anyone else.

Also the age old question, is it High Lives or High Lifes?
 
We have seen no one on this team is taking less to sign better talent. Like 99.9% of the players in the NFL they don't give a crap if they win a Super Bowl. Their main concern is how much money they make. The Packers have paid Rodgers, Clark, and Bak all at the highest paid at their postions. Next up is Adams. When you have 4-5 guys who are at or near the top of their spots you dang will better be hitting home run drafts to fill the other spots on the team with cheap young talent that can replace that high priced vet talent at some point if you expect to win long term.
 
GBP4EVER said:
We have seen no one on this team is taking less to sign better talent. Like 99.9% of the players in the NFL they don't give a crap if they win a Super Bowl. Their main concern is how much money they make. The Packers have paid Rodgers, Clark, and Bak all at the highest paid at their postions. Next up is Adams. When you have 4-5 guys who are at or near the top of their spots you dang will better be hitting home run drafts to fill the other spots on the team with cheap young talent that can replace that high priced vet talent at some point if you expect to win long term.
Click to expand...
I think 99.9% is a bit high but I digress. Yes part of it is taking less to help the cause but part of it is organizational philosophy to not kick the can down the road like NOLA & Pittsburgh for example. And what has that gotten either of them? Not much. I cringe when I hear draft and develop, “packer nation” hated that term under Thompson and bitched about dipping into FA. Now “packer nation” is bitching about not hitting on the draft. Ok I fit the latter category. But hitting on the draft is just one data point.
 
Packinatl said:
I think 99.9% is a bit high but I digress. Yes part of it is taking less to help the cause but part of it is organizational philosophy to not kick the can down the road like NOLA & Pittsburgh for example. And what has that gotten either of them? Not much. I cringe when I hear draft and develop, “packer nation” hated that term under Thompson and bitched about dipping into FA. Now “packer nation” is bitching about not hitting on the draft. Ok I fit the latter category. But hitting on the draft is just one data point.
Click to expand...
NE seemed to find the right way to do it. Did ok drafting but also were able to use FA to find older vets who were willing to take a short 1-2 year deals that was not huge money and chance to win. Plus NE when their draft picks were set to cash in big they traded them or let them walk. NE was able to find that balance between FA and drafting. Though right now GB seems to be in the we are going to go for it one more year before likely facing a blow it up year with how the cap is. It seems GB wants to be in that window of lets take it apart one year early instead of doing it one year late like most teams do as they wait for the wheels to fall off before taking the team apart.
 
GBP4EVER said:
Though right now GB seems to be in the we are going to go for it one more year before likely facing a blow it up year with how the cap is. It seems GB wants to be in that window of lets take it apart one year early instead of doing it one year late like most teams do as they wait for the wheels to fall off before taking the team apart.
Click to expand...
And due to cap reductions they had/limited options. The organization made a couple critical mistakes (IMO) this year that will come back to haunt them down the road. #1 is keeping Jones. He’s a good back and dynamic at times but inconsistent. You don’t pay that $$ for someone like that. And no I’m not going to use the “bell cow” handle either. It’s plain flat production. #2 was keeping King. Aside from the debacle vs TB, again it’s production. #3 is Lewis. He a one trick pony blocking TE. You now have 4 on the roster, really 5. Just horrible roster management. #4 cut the cord on P Smith. Does not justify his production. What’s the one common thread? Overvalue your own roster which has been an organizational philosophy for decades

The draft last year should have been a clear indication of what the plan was. It’s a 2-3 window with Rodgers. Then had the keys to Love. I don’t think it’s going to get “blown up”. It’s a nice talking point but it’s a bit misleading
 
Last edited:
Packinatl said:
And due to cap reductions they had/limited options. The organization made a couple critical mistakes (IMO) this year that will come back to haunt them down the road. #1 is keeping Jones. He’s a good back and dynamic at times but inconsistent. You don’t pay that $$ for someone like that. And no I’m not going to use the “bell cow” handle either. It’s plain flat production. #2 was keeping King. Aside from the debacle vs TB, again it’s production. #3 is Lewis. He a one trick pony blocking TE. You now have 4 on the roster, really 5. Just horrible roster management. #4 cut the cord on P Smith. Does not justify his production. What’s the one common thread? Overvalue your own roster which has been an organizational philosophy for decades

The draft last year should have been a clear indication of what the plan was. It’s a 2-3 window with Rodgers. Then had the keys to Love. I don’t think it’s going to get “blown up”. It’s a nice talking point but it’s a bit misleading
Click to expand...
I agree Packers made mistakes in re-signing those guys. But I can see this defense getting torn down. If Packers decide that its time to move on from Rodgers I can see both Smiths are gone. I can see the DC being a 1 year deal in GB if the defense is bad. Also can see Amos go. Then you bring in a young DC tell him Alexander is the guy we build around and then focus on rebuilding the D from the ground up. You will have choices like do you keep Clark or trade or release him and is Savage a guy you want to resign.
 
GBP4EVER said:
I agree Packers made mistakes in re-signing those guys. But I can see this defense getting torn down. If Packers decide that its time to move on from Rodgers I can see both Smiths are gone. I can see the DC being a 1 year deal in GB if the defense is bad. Also can see Amos go. Then you bring in a young DC tell him Alexander is the guy we build around and then focus on rebuilding the D from the ground up. You will have choices like do you keep Clark or trade or release him and is Savage a guy you want to resign.
Click to expand...
Well let’s not be naive, they have already made that decision only question is 22 or 23. I’m not going to have a knee jerk reaction and can the DC after 1 year unless is a total disaster and even then it’s not the organization philosophy. I’m not “building” my defense around a CB. That’s crazy. IF I am in rebuild mode it’s up the middle. And if I rebuild I’m first looking at a restructure not a trade or release.
 
Packinatl said:
Well let’s not be naive, they have already made that decision only question is 22 or 23. I’m not going to have a knee jerk reaction and can the DC after 1 year unless is a total disaster and even then it’s not the organization philosophy. I’m not “building” my defense around a CB. That’s crazy. IF I am in rebuild mode it’s up the middle. And if I rebuild I’m first looking at a restructure not a trade or release.
Click to expand...
Thing with Clark though question is he worth what he makes. He's not a difference making DT IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top