wgbeethree Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 6 minutes ago, Rodjahs12 said: I wish Charles Johnson fit this defense in any way at all as he’s likely going to be dirt cheap and will likely provide immediate pass rush help to whoever signs him. Unfortunately he make no sense here but I’ll root for him wherever he goes. I've mentioned this before but do we even really know what "this defense" is yet? We have Pettine's history with other defenses but I myself am not real familiar with it. Seems like he's pretty flexible though and tries to get his scheme to fit the players he has rather than trying to fit the players he has to his scheme. Sounds like he plays multiple fronts with the front 7 (not quite "34" not quite "43") and leans toward press coverage in the secondary but with some zone. Is that accurate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 11 minutes ago, Rodjahs12 said: I wish Charles Johnson fit this defense in any way at all as he’s likely going to be dirt cheap and will likely provide immediate pass rush help to whoever signs him. Unfortunately he make no sense here but I’ll root for him wherever he goes. If he rushes the passer he fits the scheme. He wouldn't be a starter, therefore his only real role is getting to the QB in sub packages. IMO scheme fit only applies to the starters. If you're a sub player (dime LB, sub rusher etc) you have to be good at the role you fulfill but it doesn't really matter how well you fit the grand scheme of the defense unless you get a rash of injuries and have to start. I'd rather have a vet EDGE like Johnson starting vs Reggie Gilbert or Kyler Fackrell however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodjahs12 Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 13 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: If he rushes the passer he fits the scheme. He wouldn't be a starter, therefore his only real role is getting to the QB in sub packages. IMO scheme fit only applies to the starters. If you're a sub player (dime LB, sub rusher etc) you have to be good at the role you fulfill but it doesn't really matter how well you fit the grand scheme of the defense unless you get a rash of injuries and have to start. I'd rather have a vet EDGE like Johnson starting vs Reggie Gilbert or Kyler Fackrell however. I’ll admit I haven’t dug into Pettine’s defense at all yet so I don’t know what his fronts look like but Johnson has always struck me as a pure hand in the dirt 4-3 end, not a guy who can really play standing up at all. If the guys here more familiar with what Pettine does feel confident he can get the most out of any pass rusher thrown at him I’d love to have him here as any other option I’ve seen presented is going to be very expensive and frankly won’t live up to the price. I know Charles isn’t where he was 5 years ago, but this team can use all the help it can get. I really believe he’ll show more as a rotational player as he’s played a ton of snaps for Carolina over the course of his career that likely partially contributed to his drop in production as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodjahs12 Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 Emmanuel Sanders is a name that keeps popping up in trade rumors recently. Any interest here? I get the sense that he’d be the kind of receiver Rodgers would love from the beginning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuckyIrish23 Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 15 minutes ago, Rodjahs12 said: Emmanuel Sanders is a name that keeps popping up in trade rumors recently. Any interest here? I get the sense that he’d be the kind of receiver Rodgers would love from the beginning. I agree. Rodgers would love this guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 Just now, Rodjahs12 said: Emmanuel Sanders is a name that keeps popping up in trade rumors recently. Any interest here? I get the sense that he’d be the kind of receiver Rodgers would love from the beginning. Why? I'm going to tread carefully here, but... Why? Emmanuel Sanders is like Cobb in almost every way. 1. What does Sanders do that Cobb can't? 2. What makes you think Rodgers would like Sanders anymore or even as much as Cobb? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodjahs12 Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 Just now, HorizontoZenith said: Why? I'm going to tread carefully here, but... Why? Emmanuel Sanders is like Cobb in almost every way. 1. What does Sanders do that Cobb can't? 2. What makes you think Rodgers would like Sanders anymore or even as much as Cobb? Sanders is a much better boundary receiver than Cobb, runs incrediblely sound routes and is a chain mover we lack on the outside right now. I understand why giving up assets for an aging receiver isn’t ideal, but Sanders would compliment Adams so well and be an immediate fix on the outside that allows Jordy to move the slot or Cobb to stay there (depending on who you’d want to keep in this scenario) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lodestar Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 Just now, Rodjahs12 said: Sanders is a much better boundary receiver than Cobb, runs incrediblely sound routes and is a chain mover we lack on the outside right now. I understand why giving up assets for an aging receiver isn’t ideal, but Sanders would compliment Adams so well and be an immediate fix on the outside that allows Jordy to move the slot or Cobb to stay there (depending on who you’d want to keep in this scenario) Agreed. Sanders may be built similarly to Cobb, but he's a different type of receiver. Much, much better on the boundary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 Add Pernell McPhee and Quentin Demps to the FA market, cut by the Bears. Also, no way to Sanders. The Broncos are grooming a young QB, and they still want to dump Sanders, that should tell you all you need to know about his production vs his contract. Now if they cut him and we cut Cobb? Maybe, I'm not opposed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodjahs12 Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 4 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: Add Pernell McPhee and Quentin Demps to the FA market, cut by the Bears. Also, no way to Sanders. The Broncos are grooming a young QB, and they still want to dump Sanders, that should tell you all you need to know about his production vs his contract. Now if they cut him and we cut Cobb? Maybe, I'm not opposed. HELL YES ON MCPHEE Also to be fair we’ve heard a lot of these same rumors on DeMaryius Thomas who also suffered a drop in production recently. If it was one or the other not producing I’d buy into this narrative more but because both of these highly regarded WRs suffered similar issues I chalk it up to who was throwing the ball mroe so than themselves. Seems like Denver is ready to hit the reset button on offense. I do agree I’d be more interested if he was cut though, but I’d be willing to move a late pick and restructure his deal if they’re that adamant about parting with him and we didn’t want to lose out on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 1 minute ago, Rodjahs12 said: HELL YES ON MCPHEE Also to be fair we’ve heard a lot of these same rumors on DeMaryius Thomas who also suffered a drop in production recently. If it was one or the other not producing I’d buy into this narrative more but because both of these highly regarded WRs suffered similar issues I chalk it up to who was throwing the ball mroe so than themselves. Seems like Denver is ready to hit the reset button on offense. I do agree I’d more interested if he was cut though, but I’d be willing to move a late pick and restructure his deal if they’re that adamant about parting with him. He's going to be 31, you have him for this year at 10m and next at 12m, without extending him I really don't see why he'd restructure. Really he's untradeable for me. If you ask Rodgers he'd probably just rather have Cobb. McPhee is definitely on my radar, although at EDGE if you were once good and still have a pulse, you're on my radar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodjahs12 Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 10 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: He's going to be 31, you have him for this year at 10m and next at 12m, without extending him I really don't see why he'd restructure. Really he's untradeable for me. If you ask Rodgers he'd probably just rather have Cobb. McPhee is definitely on my radar, although at EDGE if you were once good and still have a pulse, you're on my radar. Sanders and Cobb are just not similar receivers at all in anything but body type. Lets say you cut Cobb and give his money to Sanders instead. You’re still paying way too much money to the receiver position but Adams and Sanders on the boundaries with Nelson in the slot is far preferable to what we did last year again if you ask me. Also as a disclaimer I’m not pushing this idea because I want it to happen, I’m simply throwing feelers out there and trying to argue in favor of it to see who else would be on board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 1 minute ago, Rodjahs12 said: Sanders and Cobb are just not similar receivers at all in anything but body type. Lets say you cut Cobb and give his money to Sanders instead. You’re still paying way too much money to the receiver position but Adams and Sanders on the boundaries with Nelson in the slot is far preferable to what we did last year again if you ask me. Also as a disclaimer I’m not pushing this idea because I want it to happen, I’m simply throwing feelers out there and trying to argue in favor of it to see who else would be on board. It's not who is similar or not, it's the opportunity cost. If I cut Cobb, trade for Sanders, I've lost a draft pick and I'm spending the same money on Sanders I was Cobb. Now I'm down 10m I could've spent on the defense and a draft pick. Just no part of it interests me. Cut Cobb, sign a vet WR in that 4-5m area, use the other 4-5m to sign a mid level defensive player (like a Mcphee) and draft a WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodjahs12 Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 17 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: It's not who is similar or not, it's the opportunity cost. If I cut Cobb, trade for Sanders, I've lost a draft pick and I'm spending the same money on Sanders I was Cobb. Now I'm down 10m I could've spent on the defense and a draft pick. Just no part of it interests me. Cut Cobb, sign a vet WR in that 4-5m area, use the other 4-5m to sign a mid level defensive player (like a Mcphee) and draft a WR. Yeah this would make the most sense. If Sanders gets cut though I want him to be that vet WR right now. Could change depending on who else becomes available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haha21 Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 I would be interested in McPhee. He would be a solid 3rd EDGE on this team and since he was released he won't cost us a compensatory pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.