Brat&Beer Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 Barton! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaRisMa Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 Pratt under, Cooper under, Corum over, Wiggins under. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas492 Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 1 hour ago, Mdpackfan22 said: While I agree with the logic, we have a long history of successfully drafting WRs. Pass Rushers and defense in general on the other hand.. I just don't believe in paying WRs big money. They're completely dependent on another position(QB) and indirectly dependent on 5 other positions(OL). It doesn't matter if you have prime Jerry Rice and Randy Moss if your QB can't get him the ball or doesn't have time to I get what you are saying too, it just makes little sense to me. Maybe WR's are easier to find than pass rushers. But last year showed that 1200 12 TD WRs were very, very rare. That year isn't just good, it is in fact, elite. A pass rusher with 10 sacks? There were a lot of them. 10 isn't even a very good year, let alone elite. And we paid our guy because he worked hard and earned it, as a pass rusher. No reason to not pay a WR in the same situation, only he proved to be elite. Who was the last elite player we let walk? Jennings maybe? And I think TT offered him a lot (at the time) and he chose to leave and got like the same deal in FA...and then was heard of no more in the league. Guess I hope we wouldn't be in the business of developing guys and then not paying them. I know it seems like we have a lot of WR that we will need to pay. But that is years away and things do happen. I'll bet you aren't much worried about it yet. And I'm not either, but I'll always advocate for paying as many of our own guys as we possibly can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas492 Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 1 hour ago, Old Guy said: I would say that is the one minor contention I have with your post. WR is not a premium position. Regarding Devonte Smith, 25 million for a not top 10 WR is an easy, let him walk, for me. And we paid...checks notes, well, ALL of our WR's who have put in the time, improved and become very good. We've not let one of them go. And I'm going to back to Sharpe now. Even Jennings got paid once. Was set to get more from TT, then decided to bail...and was heard of no more. We paid Nelson, despite him not producing much for 3 years. We paid Cobb, while paying Nelson earlier. We paid 'Vante. Were set to pay him LARGE, when he decided to play in Vegas. I get how you may personally feel about the position, but we pay our guys, even lowly non-premium WR's. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas492 Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 (edited) 1 hour ago, HokieHigh said: You pay jordan love and an offensive line so the bo meltons of the world can go out there and catch 1000 yards. take the picks to keep under the cap and invest in high level athleticism on the defensive side of the ball. Did we not pay Favre and Freeman/Driver? Betcha we would have paid Brooks had he not been injured. And Favre had some very good lines in front of him. Did we not pay Rodgers/Jennings/Nelson/Cobb/Adams? Again, while having a very good line for Rodgers. Again, I get what you say, but our past tells us that we do pay homegrown talent. It'll take Bo Melton 4-5 years to get 1000 yards in the league. The next time he tops 250 yards in the league, will be the first time he tops 250 yards in the league. I can't believe I'm sitting here reading about trading a hypothetical elite WR with 2600 yards 24 TD's in a two year span so that the team can play a "Bo Melton type player" while investing more in the defense. If you have a great to elite talent, you pay the man. It really is that simple. Edited April 15 by vegas492 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spilltray Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 And what was the outcome of paying those WR? I'd argue not good. Under both Rodgers AND Favre the offense was better when the position was young, deep, and cheap, rather than with high end WR contracts. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrILL! Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoremore Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 1 hour ago, vegas492 said: Did we not pay Favre and Freeman/Driver? Betcha we would have paid Brooks had he not been injured. And Favre had some very good lines in front of him. Did we not pay Rodgers/Jennings/Nelson/Cobb/Adams? Again, while having a very good line for Rodgers. Again, I get what you say, but our past tells us that we do pay homegrown talent. It'll take Bo Melton 4-5 years to get 1000 yards in the league. The next time he tops 250 yards in the league, will be the first time he tops 250 yards in the league. I can't believe I'm sitting here reading about trading a hypothetical elite WR with 2600 yards 24 TD's in a two year span so that the team can play a "Bo Melton type player" while investing more in the defense. If you have a great to elite talent, you pay the man. It really is that simple. Hey don't be underselling my man Bo. MLF's offense is pretty good at scheming guys open. We have really 2 elite guys in Watson and Reed. The other WR's are very very good. Only so much cash to go around and with WR contracts reaching the stratosphere we won't be able to sign them all. Some of these guys we may be able to tag and trade. Recoup some draft capital and reinvest in the position. Can't expect the same kind of drafting success as Gute has had the last 2 years. Damn near hit on all of them. That's rare. Anyway some of these guys will have to be traded no way around it. Think some of these teams are crazy for the money they are throwing around on WR's. Really screwed up the market. Pay your pass rushers, corners, tackles, and the QB. WR is not where you want to allocate large chunks of the cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HokieHigh Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 2 hours ago, vegas492 said: Did we not pay Favre and Freeman/Driver? Betcha we would have paid Brooks had he not been injured. And Favre had some very good lines in front of him. Did we not pay Rodgers/Jennings/Nelson/Cobb/Adams? Again, while having a very good line for Rodgers. Again, I get what you say, but our past tells us that we do pay homegrown talent. It'll take Bo Melton 4-5 years to get 1000 yards in the league. The next time he tops 250 yards in the league, will be the first time he tops 250 yards in the league. I can't believe I'm sitting here reading about trading a hypothetical elite WR with 2600 yards 24 TD's in a two year span so that the team can play a "Bo Melton type player" while investing more in the defense. If you have a great to elite talent, you pay the man. It really is that simple. Devante adams or watson+quay+10to15 million per year? That trade was definitely a win for the packers. Contracts were different in the driver era. Draft picks were paid proportionally much more. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turf toe Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 (edited) 14 hours ago, spilltray said: And what was the outcome of paying those WR? I'd argue not good. Under both Rodgers AND Favre the offense was better when the position was young, deep, and cheap, rather than with high end WR contracts. wrong topic. Edited April 16 by turf toe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 After years of discussing whether the careers of both Favre and Rogers were hamstrung by mediocre WR rooms, I am finding this new debate about whether GB should pay elite young WR's quite amusing. Lack of talent at WR was always the goto argument for the ARDS. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 13 hours ago, thrILL! said: Saban spent his whole life not saying anything bad about his opponent. He's going to be all rainbows and unicorns about every prospect. There will be no inside information, like how they scouted a player and how they could expose him. Not sure what he can add to the discussion that isn't already on set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 1 minute ago, Old Guy said: Saban spent his whole life not saying anything bad about his opponent. He's going to be all rainbows and unicorns about every prospect. There will be no inside information, like how they scouted a player and how they could expose him. Not sure what he can add to the discussion that isn't already on set. The priorities of a coach vs the priorities of a media member are very different things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spilltray Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 16 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said: After years of discussing whether the careers of both Favre and Rogers were hamstrung by mediocre WR rooms, I am finding this new debate about whether GB should pay elite young WR's quite amusing. Lack of talent at WR was always the goto argument for the ARDS. No neither one was. For most of booths careers they had + WR rooms not mediocre ones. This is just media/idiot fans going "ermerghad no first round picks they all suck" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 Just now, spilltray said: No neither one was. For most of booths careers they had + WR rooms not mediocre ones. This is just media/idiot fans going "ermerghad no first round picks they all suck" If they had + WR rooms for most of their careers, why are we debating whether elite young WR's should be paid? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts