4-7-1 to 9-3, why?

[MacReady]

I really hate idiots who can’t see the value in letting a player’s contract run out.  How ****ing stupid do you have to be to not see that players will be more likely to sign with us if they see that we actually honor the contracts that we sign?

Cut Matthews a year early.  Cut Perry a year early.  Cut Jordy a year early.  Cut Cobb a year early.  Cut Daniels a year early.  Cut all those players a year early and WTF do you think Clark is going to think?  WTF is Z. Smith going to think?

That’s not to mention either that you don’t go cutting players without an equal or better option.  

Edited December 2, 2019 by Outpost31

[TheOnlyThing]

Jordy was cut before his contract ran out. 

Perry was cut before his contract ran out.

Daniels was cut before his contract ran out.

(Anyone think Graham is gonna get cut before his contract runs out?)

And yet Z Smith, P. Smith, Adrian Amos, and Billy Turner, all signed as free agents with Green Bay.

Weird.

[AlexGreen#20]

1 hour ago, TheOnlyThing said:

Yep, sure would have been better for Gute not to have paid Matthews $11.4M for those 3.5 sacks and bad run defense in 2018 but then again he had so much dead weight to offload from the roster he inherited that he could hardly be expected to jettison all of it in just one off-season.

Anyway, better late than never in moving on from overpaid under-performers.

And who implied Matthews and Perry "were cancerous" besides yourself?

I just noted that it was nifty that Gute both recognized that the play of Matthews and Perry on the field in no way merited their huge cap hits and was wise enough to sign much, much better outside linebackers in P & Z Smith to replace them.

I mean, is there really any doubt that Gute moving on from Matthews and Perry and replacing them with the Smith brothers is one of the most important reasons the team has improved from 4-7-1 after 12 games in 2018 to to 9-3 in 2019?

 

 

That makes no sense. You want to get rid of toxic assets. Not keep them. If Gute had been smart, he would have cut Matthews before 2018 and we would have had a worse record so we would likely have picked Josh Allen instead of Gary and had a large sum of money to go after a stud interior D lineman rather than giving Lowry that stinker of a deal. It's not like Gute couldn't cut Matthews because of a dead cap hit or something??

This narrative you keep pushing that Gute recognized Clay was bad value and got rid of him is just factually incorrect. Gute failed to recognize bad value in 2018.

Gute then did the exact thing you're sore about and turned Lowry into a toxic asset. 

He deserves all the credit in the world for bringing in P and Z, but to act like it was some sort of brilliant controversial decision to cut Perry and . . . Not resign Matthews(?) is just bizarre logic. Everybody on the board would have made the exact same decision.

[coachbuns]

5 hours ago, Joe said:

...and if we didn't have those pieces we would see more regression...because we have no interior presence other than Clark and Martinez....

An 8 position upgrade from 22 to 14 is not insignificant.  Yes, there has been upgrades but for heavens sake they were needed.  The interior of our DL and inside LB talent is below normal except for Clark and maybe Martinez.   Pettine and his bend but don't break defense is death by a 1000 paper cuts.  Taking  6-7-8 minutes off the clock due to the defense playing this scheme hurts the offense tremendously as you can't score without the ball.  Fix that ... score more.  

[Packerraymond]

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

I really hate idiots who can’t see the value in letting a player’s contract run out.  How ****ing stupid do you have to be to not see that players will be more likely to sign with us if they see that we actually honor the contracts that we sign?

Cut Matthews a year early.  Cut Perry a year early.  Cut Jordy a year early.  Cut Cobb a year early.  Cut Daniels a year early.  Cut all those players a year early and WTF do you think Clark is going to think?  WTF is Z. Smith going to think?

That’s not to mention either that you don’t go cutting players without an equal or better option.  

No one honors the last year of a player contract. It's usually low guaranteed money with a bloated base salary, Matthews, Perry, Graham all examples of this.

[Norm]

3 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

No one honors the last year of a player contract. It's usually low guaranteed money with a bloated base salary, Matthews, Perry, Graham all examples of this.

Or when we cut Peppers.

No really. Remember when he was going to get cut every year for what felt like half a decade lol

And I actually disagree with Outpost. Pro football players are too dumb/arrogant. Always convinced they'll play so well they'll see that last year and all its money. Could be wrong, but that's my feel. That's why those deals happen so often. Plus the agent knows how good it looks to potential clients too.

Edited December 2, 2019 by Norm

[Pugger]

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

I really hate idiots who can’t see the value in letting a player’s contract run out.  How ****ing stupid do you have to be to not see that players will be more likely to sign with us if they see that we actually honor the contracts that we sign?

Cut Matthews a year early.  Cut Perry a year early.  Cut Jordy a year early.  Cut Cobb a year early.  Cut Daniels a year early.  Cut all those players a year early and WTF do you think Clark is going to think?  WTF is Z. Smith going to think?

That’s not to mention either that you don’t go cutting players without an equal or better option.  

Clay and Perry were not producing so I don't think it was a year too early.  It might have been a year too late.  Daniels wasn't cut a year too early.  He hasn't done much of anything since he left.

[AlexGreen#20]

15 minutes ago, Pugger said:

Clay and Perry were not producing so I don't think it was a year too early.  It might have been a year too late.  Daniels wasn't cut a year too early.  He hasn't done much of anything since he left.

Clay Matthews was not cut.

This is the danger of letting bad opinions go unchecked @Packerraymond

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

That makes no sense. You want to get rid of toxic assets. Not keep them. If Gute had been smart, he would have cut Matthews before 2018 and we would have had a worse record so we would likely have picked Josh Allen instead of Gary and had a large sum of money to go after a stud interior D lineman rather than giving Lowry that stinker of a deal. It's not like Gute couldn't cut Matthews because of a dead cap hit or something??

This narrative you keep pushing that Gute recognized Clay was bad value and got rid of him is just factually incorrect. Gute failed to recognize bad value in 2018.

Gute then did the exact thing you're sore about and turned Lowry into a toxic asset. 

He deserves all the credit in the world for bringing in P and Z, but to act like it was some sort of brilliant controversial decision to cut Perry and . . . Not resign Matthews(?) is just bizarre logic. Everybody on the board would have made the exact same decision.

I agree with most of what you said.

I would contend that while Lowry is a "toxic asset", his contract makes him very easy to cut which makes him a "placeholder" in my mind- someone who is necessary right now because they couldn't come up with something better, but can be moved out if/when something better comes along.

[Pugger]

1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Clay Matthews was not cut.

This is the danger of letting bad opinions go unchecked @Packerraymond

Oh yes, of course.  As someone else said we should have cut him in 2018.

[Gopackgonerd]

2 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

I really hate idiots who can’t see the value in letting a player’s contract run out.  How ****ing stupid do you have to be to not see that players will be more likely to sign with us if they see that we actually honor the contracts that we sign?

 

I'm all for letting contracts run their course.

But I dont think that's gonna  factor in much from potential FAs signing with us. It's mainly about location and how much money they are getting. Plus if you think about it they should be happy they are replacing said players that got released.

[MacReady]

1 minute ago, Gopackgonerd said:

I'm all for letting contracts run their course.

But I dont think that's gonna  factor in much from potential FAs signing with us. It's mainly about location and how much money they are getting. Plus if you think about it they should be happy they are replacing said players that got released.

It’s definitely not a huge factor, but it is one.  Especially when it comes to guys we draft.  I’d imagine they’re more likely to sign a team friendly deal if they see all the guys who underperformed whom we did not cut.  

[Malfatron]

6 hours ago, Packerraymond said:

There's analytics I get behind 100% and ones I completely disregard. Being around football my whole life until recently, I disregard anything that says clutch performance is random. Leadership and team culture play a huge part in it, some guys play with nerves and some don't. 

I think this team is run by the veterans this year (how a team should run IMO) and last year it was run by the coaches. The loose playing style mixed with a good deal of veterans who have been there before is a good mix for close game situations.

Yep.

exhibit A: Chargers.

[Gopackgonerd]

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

It’s definitely not a huge factor, but it is one.  Especially when it comes to guys we draft.  I’d imagine they’re more likely to sign a team friendly deal if they see all the guys who underperformed whom we did not cut.  

You also gotta take into consideration most of the guys we've released the past couple of years were on 2nd contracts, so it's not like we called it quits on them on their final year of their rookie deal. Besides a few outliers like Randall and HaHa. I just think its pretty normal how frequently guys get cut and traded now adays that I don't think big name free agents are gonna second guess a signing because we released guys that haven't been performing that well towards the end of their contract. Get that guarantee and you shouldn't worry about getting cut quickly as long as you play well. I mean look at this offseason, I don't think the Smiths cared that we replaced Clay/Perry with them, and they've tripled what they had in sacks a year ago. If you wanna make a case for guys that are in the market for their 3rd+ big contract sure, but we've still went through guys 2nd year in those kinds of contracts like Peppers and now Graham. It's not like we're releasing guys on and off every year like the Rams and Patriots. 

Edited December 3, 2019 by Gopackgonerd

[CWood21]

12 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

1. Pure dumbass luck. Last year's team had a 7.5-8.5 differential and finished 6.5-9.5. This year's team has a 9-7 differential and will finish 11-5 or 12-4. Some times luck is all it is.

2. Injuries have been huge. We've been amazingly healthy this year. Combining the health and luck we've had so far this year, we're easily next year's top regression candidate.

3. The defense is just flat more talented. The free agent acquisitions have been huge. Considering how much more talented this unit is, the fact we've only improved marginally is troubling.

+++

I don't mean to say that I think LaFleur has nothing to do with the improvement, but it's not like our offense is noticeably better

Right there with you.  I'd also add that our franchise QB isn't publicly feuding with our HC either.