Jump to content

2020 Off-season Discussion Thread


squire12

Recommended Posts

Just now, AlexGreen#20 said:

His job is not in jeporady, what are you even talking about?

Why would he need to trim payroll next year? We're going to have 60 million in cap space with only three big FA that need to be resigned, Bakhtiari, Clark, and King. We have plenty of Free Agency money for next year. We could have gotten 6 million more dollars by changing Z's contact and we still would have been fine for next year.

You misrepresented what I said. I said IF he had to trim payroll next year and things went south he could be in jeopardy. If he goes all in, he's pushing money into next year with restructures such as Z's contract. You push a portion of that money into future years. That is the way this works. You also understand making a splash signing would be for more than one year and also eat up some of that cap space.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ThatJerkDave said:

What makes it a C plus?

IMO we are a worse team than we were at the end of the season. We lost: Bulaga, Martinez, Tramon, Allison, Graham, Vitale, Veldheer.  Added Wagner, Funches, and Kirksey.  Inarguable step back at tackle, FB, and TE.  Maybe an upgrade at WR.  Probable downgrade at ILB.  We are apparently trying to extend a running back, and haven't paid Kenny Clark, yet.  Probably the biggest contributing factor to losing the NFCC, defensive line, has not been addressed.  And we are pretty strapped for cap room. 

IMO, we get the old "D" for diploma.  

C+ isn't to far away considering what the other teams in the North did.  Minnesota and Chicago got a lot worse with Detroit being Detroit.  Packers lost some players but not anywhere near what Minn and Chicago did and replaced them with lesser players.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Golfman said:

You misrepresented what I said. I said IF he had to trim payroll next year and things went south he could be in jeopardy. If he goes all in, he's pushing money into next year with restructures such as Z's contract. You push a portion of that money into future years. That is the way this works. You also understand making a splash signing would be for more than one year and also eat up some of that cap space.

 

We did that. We pushed a ton of Rodgers' money into next year. We then spent the offseason getting worse as a team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

We did that. We pushed a ton of Rodgers' money into next year. We then spent the offseason getting worse as a team. 

To make room for Kirksey and Wagner. Had we not done what we'd have a whole bunch of nobody at RT and ILB. Time will tell on getting worse. I'll say this, we still have no answer for San Francisco running the ball down out throat. That much I think we agree on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Golfman said:

To make room for Kirksey and Wagner. Had we not done what we'd have a whole bunch of nobody at RT and ILB. Time will tell on getting worse. I'll say this, we still have no answer for San Francisco running the ball down out throat. That much I think we agree on. 

Again, 8 million dollars in cap space. 12 if you cut Taylor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can’t get over that Yannick trade rumor.  Assuming it’s true we are interested, what’s more likely:

1. We’re planning on giving up on Gary and using him in the trade

2. Gary adding weight and playing DL?

I’m full paranoid conspiracy mode with our complete lack of attention to DL.

Edited by Outpost31
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Outpost31 said:

I can’t get over that Yannick trade rumor.  Assuming it’s true we are interested, what’s more likely:

1. We’re planning on giving up on Gary and using him in the trade

2. Gary adding weight and playing DL?

I’m full paranoid conspiracy mode with our complete lack of attention to DL.

We're not trading for Yannick

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I look at things differently. Assuming the training room doesn't become a MASH tent:

Can the Packers win a Super Bowl with the current offensive line ?

Can the Packers win a Super Bowl with the current crop of WR's ?

The defense is a different story all together. I'm not smart enough to decide if Kirksey has the desired domino effect needed. Last year I wanted a DL with pick #12, and if available, I'm leaning that way again. We've seen the model of stopping bad teams during the year only to get blown out in record breaking fashion in the playoffs repeatedly.  Does the right DL bring everything together ? That's my best guess at it.  Maybe some believe a guy like Queen would do that. I don't think a guy like Jefferson (offense) does it. Just too much of a defensive dropoff to expect needle movers at #60 for the defense. If you can't fix 70-10 nothing else matters

Edited by cannondale
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, cannondale said:

I look at things differently. Assuming the training room doesn't become a MASH tent:

Can the Packers win a Super Bowl with the current offensive line ?

Can the Packers win a Super Bowl with the current crop of WR's ?

The defense is a different story all together. I'm not smart enough to decide if Kirksey has the desired domino effect needed. Last year I wanted a DL with pick #12, and if available, I'm leaning that way again. We've seen the model of stopping bad teams during the year only to get blown out in record breaking fashion in the playoffs repeatedly.  Does the right DL bring everything together ? That's my best guess at it.  Maybe some believe a guy like Queen would do that. I don't think a guy like Jefferson (offense) does it. Just too much of a defensive dropoff to expect needle movers at #60 for the defense. If you can't fix 70-10 nothing else matters

I know it has been 25 years, but I don't think our OL or WRs are that much worse than the 96 squad.  That DL was far superior however.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone discussed the potential for a trade with the Chargers involving Desmond King? They signed Chris Harris to play the slot (Kings role). I could see a trade involving Taylor for King positions of need for both teams.  

Edited by Nick_gb
Used the wrong "roll" stupid phone lol.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Nick_gb said:

Has anyone discussed the potential for a trade with the Chargers involving Desmond King? They signed Chris Harris to play the slot (Kings roll). I could see a trade involving Taylor for King positions of need for both teams.  

I've been wondering about the Chargers as a destination for Taylor ever since they brought James Campen on board.
But when I looked at their IOL  depth chart it didn't seem to be lacking

https://www.ourlads.com/nfldepthcharts/depthchart/LAC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Nick_gb said:

Has anyone discussed the potential for a trade with the Chargers involving Desmond King? They signed Chris Harris to play the slot (Kings roll). I could see a trade involving Taylor for King positions of need for both teams.  

At this point it can't hurt. 

I'm deeply concerned we're going to be starting Lazard, Lancaster, and Sullivan with some rookies competing and ultimately losing out to those guys. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

I've been wondering about the Chargers as a destination for Taylor ever since they brought James Campen on board.
But when I looked at their IOL  depth chart it didn't seem to be lacking

https://www.ourlads.com/nfldepthcharts/depthchart/LAC

When I looked up the Charger's main needs after Free agency OG fell #2 because of Lamps injury last year and questionable play at the LG position while also wanting an upgrade at RG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...