Jump to content

2018 Free Agency - Prospects for GB


Sasquatch

Recommended Posts

Just now, DavidatMIZZOU said:

Ryan Pickett and Marquand Manuel were both 27 when they signed and turned 28 during the season in which they both first appeared as Packers.  What do I win?

Picket signed a 4 year, 14 million dollar deal.  3.5 million a year, even in 2006, is not a significant deal.  Pickett was not (at the time) a significant free agent.  He turned out to be huge for us, yes, but he is not what anybody would have called significant when we signed him.

Manuel.  Get outta here.  lol. 

Dotson is the closest anyone is gonna find. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Picket signed a 4 year, 14 million dollar deal.  3.5 million a year, even in 2006, is not a significant deal.  Pickett was not (at the time) a significant free agent.  He turned out to be huge for us, yes, but he is not what anybody would have called significant when we signed him.

Manuel.  Get outta here.  lol. 

Dotson is the closest anyone is gonna find. 

Manuel was a bust of a signing, but he was a coveted FA addition that offseason.  Pickett had just come off of leading DL in tackles for the Rams.  Both were significant signings of that offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DavidatMIZZOU said:

Manuel was a bust of a signing, but he was a coveted FA addition that offseason.  Pickett had just come off of leading DL in tackles for the Rams.  Both were significant signings of that offseason.

No.  You know what I'm  talking about.  Neither of them was a Trumaine Johnson or a significant free agent signing.  You know it.  The best anybody would have said about them was, "Good addition for the Packers." 

It wasn't a Suh, it wasn't a Mathieu, they were considered standard free agent signings if any other team signed them.  If that's the best you can come up with, you're proving my point, and you know it.  You're just choosing to argue even though you know what I'm saying, and you know I'm right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey if ya gotta be right keep narrowing the parameters. Maybe say "okay I'll give you Dotson, but now name anyone under 25, oh and they have to be a consensus marquee name! Last name has to start with 'F'! See nobody!"

You will win the net. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kepler said:

Hey if ya gotta be right keep narrowing the parameters.

I'm not narrowing the parameters.  Julius Peppers, Jimmy Graham, Charles Woodson.  Those are significant free agent signings.  Ryan Pickett, Marquand Manuel, Brandon Chillar... Those are not significant signings.  Everyone knows it.  The only reason they think they are or were significant is because they're fans of the Packers and the Packers don't sign significant free agents no matter who the hell is GM because they're the Green Bay Packers. 

Literally any other argument and people are saying Pickett and Manuel weren't significant.  They all know it's true, too.  You know it's true.

Do you honestly, yes or no, think that at the time, Pickett or Manuel was a significant free agent signing? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, HorizontoZenith said:

I'm not narrowing the parameters.  Julius Peppers, Jimmy Graham, Charles Woodson.  Those are significant free agent signings.  Ryan Pickett, Marquand Manuel, Brandon Chillar... Those are not significant signings.  Everyone knows it.  The only reason they think they are or were significant is because they're fans of the Packers and the Packers don't sign significant free agents no matter who the hell is GM because they're the Green Bay Packers. 

Literally any other argument and people are saying Pickett and Manuel weren't significant.  They all know it's true, too.  You know it's true.

Do you honestly, yes or no, think that at the time, Pickett or Manuel was a significant free agent signing? 

Woodson was significant for GB. Before the signing he languished a long time in FA, because he was not sought after. 

As far as the parameters, no you didn't narrow them because they were already significantly narrow enough in order for you to be right. Or at least until Dotson was mentioned. 

Literally anyone can be right in any argument they narrow the parameters on. What's the reason for the arbitrary age range of your argument? People don't care about a night life after 28? I sure as hell did well into my 30's, and I can rattle off a laundry list of football players over 28 who either got in trouble or were in the news for excessive partying antics. 

The only reason for the arbitrary age cut off was to make your argument about FA appear correct. It's a very disingenuous way to argue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kepler said:

The only reason for the arbitrary age cut off was to make your argument about FA appear correct. It's a very disingenuous way to argue. 

What about this concept is so hard to grasp?  We're hanging on Peppers, Woodson, Graham and Woodson over the past 10 years.  That's four significant free agents for one team over the past ten years and somehow I'm the one asking too much.

I'll make it really easy for you.  Any age.  Any age over the past thirty years.  Count them all out.  Count all the significant free agents of any age

FOR THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF THE PACKERS.

Now compare that to other teams.

The Jaguars signed more significant free agents the last two years than the Packers have LITERALLY SINCE FREE AGENCY HAS EXISTED and I'm the one being unrealistic? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...