cannondale Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 44 minutes ago, ArthurPensky said: On here and draft twitter, I seem to keep coming across the idea that Gutey is somehow following the "Eagles model of not wanting to have good secondary" and that he isn't exploring avenues to upgrade CB. That seems to contradict what Gutey said in his press conference of looking hard at improving that position. So which is it? Mission accomplished Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 1 minute ago, DavidatMIZZOU said: Because Morgan Burnett signed with the Steelers? No. Because day one we were linked to Wilkerson, Johnson, Robinson, Watkins, Graham, Melvin. Since then our beat writers could've taken a vacation and not missed news outside the Kyle Fuller Hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Burnett is status quo. Status quo is only okay (a) if it is working and (b) if you don't mean to improve the position. The ONLY problem I have with letting Burnett go is if GB doesn't have a suitable plan to replace him. What is a suitable plan? IMO, it means going with Jones first, BUT also signing a journeyman vet as a primary backup in case Jones cannot handle it. Brice is JAG and I couldn't really care less about him. But the plan all along was to draft Jones to replace Burnett, otherwise it was a dumb draft pick. So either Jones, a 2nd round pick, lives up to his draft status, or he's another TT busted pick. We don't know the answer to that yet, but we will find out. What I would like to see is GB add a cheap SS vet as insurance. Moreover, this adds fuel to the fire that GB needs at least 2 veteran CBs. Having a secondary in which HHCD is the only player with 2+ years of experience is an epic disaster and inexcusable. As for Burnett himself, the guys is apparently a great leader, no argument there. But that's about it. He's a poor tackler. He had 0 sacks last year. He had 0 INTs last year. He forced 1 fumble. He had 3 PDs....3. Take away the "leader" part and any rookie off the street is giving you those stats. The guy simply is not a playmaker at the position and never really has been. He's the definition of the word "average" at the safety position. So no, I'm not going to miss Burnett, the player. The only thing I will say for him is like Hayward and Hyde, Burnett was forced to play under Capers for years which undoubtedly had a negative impact on him so it wouldn't surprise me to see him make a few more plays for Pitt, but at his age, that's not as likely compared to the changes we saw with Hayward and Hyde. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 1 minute ago, packfanfb said: Burnett is status quo. Status quo is only okay (a) if it is working and (b) if you don't mean to improve the position. The ONLY problem I have with letting Burnett go is if GB doesn't have a suitable plan to replace him. What is a suitable plan? IMO, it means going with Jones first, BUT also signing a journeyman vet as a primary backup in case Jones cannot handle it. Brice is JAG and I couldn't really care less about him. But the plan all along was to draft Jones to replace Burnett, otherwise it was a dumb draft pick. So either Jones, a 2nd round pick, lives up to his draft status, or he's another TT busted pick. We don't know the answer to that yet, but we will find out. What I would like to see is GB add a cheap SS vet as insurance. Moreover, this adds fuel to the fire that GB needs at least 2 veteran CBs. Having a secondary in which HHCD is the only player with 2+ years of experience is an epic disaster and inexcusable. As for Burnett himself, the guys is apparently a great leader, no argument there. But that's about it. He's a poor tackler. He had 0 sacks last year. He had 0 INTs last year. He forced 1 fumble. He had 3 PDs....3. Take away the "leader" part and any rookie off the street is giving you those stats. The guy simply is not a playmaker at the position and never really has been. He's the definition of the word "average" at the safety position. So no, I'm not going to miss Burnett, the player. The only thing I will say for him is like Hayward and Hyde, Burnett was forced to play under Capers for years which undoubtedly had a negative impact on him so it wouldn't surprise me to see him make a few more plays for Pitt, but at his age, that's not as likely compared to the changes we saw with Hayward and Hyde. Kentrell Brice is better than most stopgap FAs you'll find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Penske Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 7 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: Because day one we were linked to Wilkerson, Johnson, Robinson, Watkins, Graham, Melvin. Since then our beat writers could've taken a vacation and not missed news outside the Kyle Fuller Hour. A Vacation from retweeting Rapsheet and Shefter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaegybomb Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Burnett wasn't average and even if Jones works out he isn't going to be better than peak Burnett. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 1 minute ago, ArthurPensky said: A Vacation from retweeting Rapsheet and Shefter? Don't forget James Jones, the best Packers insider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 1 minute ago, Jaegybomb said: Burnett wasn't average and even if Jones works out he isn't going to be better than peak Burnett. I love these over-reaching statements lol. Are you the guy that said Rodgers was only going to take us to the "toilet bowl" in 2008? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyecatcher Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 2 minutes ago, Jaegybomb said: Burnett wasn't average and even if Jones works out he isn't going to be better than peak Burnett. Why is that. He's more athletic than Burnett. Jones has the potential to be far better than peak Burnett IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaegybomb Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Burnett impressed since the first time he stepped on the field. Jones hasn't shown anything yet other than his combine times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartacus Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 5 minutes ago, eyecatcher said: Why is that. He's more athletic than Burnett. Jones has the potential to be far better than peak Burnett IMO. Not to mention the one game they allowed him to play the Burnett role he had 2 sacks I believe. People just love to complain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 33 minutes ago, ArthurPensky said: On here and draft twitter, I seem to keep coming across the idea that Gutey is somehow following the "Eagles model of not wanting to have good secondary" and that he isn't exploring avenues to upgrade CB. That seems to contradict what Gutey said in his press conference of looking hard at improving that position. So which is it? I’d be disinclined to believe anything on twitter. I’m sure Gutey is looking “hard” at improving the position, but none of us can say what exactly that means. Maybe it just means having college scouting efforts focused more on those positions. Or pro scouts focusing more, but still setting a $ limit on how much you’d be willing or able to spend. There’s a lot that goes on that fans don’t see. Unless a guy makes a quantifiable statement in a press conference, fans can’t make much of it one way or the other Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaegybomb Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 7 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: I love these over-reaching statements lol. Are you the guy that said Rodgers was only going to take us to the "toilet bowl" in 2008? I have no idea what that even means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaegybomb Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 The move makes sense from a 4 year perspective but don't diminish what Burnett did for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 20 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: Because day one we were linked to Wilkerson, Johnson, Robinson, Watkins, Graham, Melvin. Since then our beat writers could've taken a vacation and not missed news outside the Kyle Fuller Hour. And we got two of them. We can't sign everybody. Besides, Donatello Brown >>> remaining CBs anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.