Leader Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 Ahhhhhh yes. The DR thread is still going strong. Lets see how drastic the concerns are following a good nights sleep...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinaski_86 Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 9 minutes ago, sgtcheezwiz said: I get we need more than two cornerbacks but you can draft depth and your 4th CB doesn't have to be a 1st round pick. I can understand being critical of the trade, but acting like we lost the iff aeaain because Randall won't be our #4 is crazy talk. If by April we are still looking at King and pipkins, then maybe you guys are right. But not necessarily as a pass rusher like wilkerson could help to improve the secondary as well, add in a first round CB and there could be a net gain, PLUS less ? Over back up QB. Let's take the magnifying glass off the cornerbacks for a second and consider the broader context of the off-season and success on defense. Especially considering the deep CB draft class and a decent FA class as well. You absolutely cannot judge this deal until we see what happens next. I like this deal because I think it shows they will make some moves at CB, if that doesn't happen ofc I will be pissed - but I am willing to wait and see and I'm not offended they didn't immediately make a deal for a CB just to settle my anxieties. I was skeptical there was a precedent for stockpiling CB's on Pettine's Defense ,as suggested we should do at various points in this thread, so I looked into it briefly. In 2010 the Jets has Revis, Cro, and 1st rounder Kyle Wilson as the #3. While it isn't quite the same as Randall at #4 it gives me credence to the stockpile mentality. But Wilson was a rookie, and Cro was of course brought over in FA. I think the Packers can still acquire two cornerbacks. Saying a 3rd round pick would be more helpful than Kizer sounds great until Rodgers gets hurt and we blame Gute for not doing anything to find a back up. It's a complicated case, lot of ins - lot of outs . . . You don't need to stockpile CB's when one of the CB's on your team is an All-Pro named Revis. And this team is still screwed if Rodgers gets hurt. Hundley won't change that. Kizer won't change that. Very few backup QB's in this league can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantyWrestler Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 I think we need most of our picks. At least we’ll have drafted players on the roster and not FA’s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 If somebody wants to tell me they like this trade making the following assumptions: 1. They value the backup QB position a lot. They think Rodgers will go down for a few games this year and we'll need a better backup QB than Hundley to compete for the playoffs. 2. They've evaluated Hundley and Kizer and come to the conclusion that Hundley is nothing and Kizer is going to be significantly better with potential to be QBOTF post Rodgers. 3. They believe that Randall was such a bad locker room influence that it cancelled out his contributions as a player relative to Josh Hawkins. If somebody believes all three of those things, I get liking this trade. I just don't believe any of those things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 4 hours ago, Chili said: If you cannot throw a touchdown at Lambeau field after receiving 3 years of NFL level coaching and watching Aaron Rodgers day in and day out then you're probably aren't good enough to play in the NFL. It's time to move on from Hundley. With our limited cap space we don't have the luxury of signing an experienced backup NFL QB nor do we have the luxury of spending a draft pick on a QB when we have so many holes to fill elsewhere. Getting Kizer gives us a cheap QB with 3 years on his contract and gives us the opportunity to start over with a new backup QB. We did it without giving up a draft pick (or losing a compensatory pick if we signed a FA QB) and in exchange gave up a player we wanted nothing more to do with. This trade solved our QB problem for now, gained some draft flexibility and a little bit more salary cap space. The draft pick that would've been spent on a QB will now be used to acquire a corner, possibily in a trade up thanks to the higher draft picks we got from the Browns. Now there ya go! Some rational thought has entered the fray! (They dont have a thumbs up emoticon, but consider it applied here). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantyWrestler Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said: If somebody wants to tell me they like this trade making the following assumptions: 1. They value the backup QB position a lot. They think Rodgers will go down for a few games this year and we'll need a better backup QB than Hundley to compete for the playoffs. 2. They've evaluated Hundley and Kizer and come to the conclusion that Hundley is nothing and Kizer is going to be significantly better with potential to be QBOTF post Rodgers. 3. They believe that Randall was such a bad locker room influence that it cancelled out his contributions as a player relative to Josh Hawkins. If somebody believes all three of those things, I get liking this trade. I just don't believe any of those things. I think 3. Carries a lot of weight here. Maybe the Packers aren’t planning on doling out another huge contract for Rogers either. Maybe they plan on letting him play this one out and seeing what happens then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 1 hour ago, cannondale said: We only see the tip of the iceburg. Randall was dead man walking at best And dead men....at that pace.....have difficulty covering in the NFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugger Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 12 hours ago, Stevein2012 said: I guess when McCarthy angrily proclaimed the QB room being right where it needs to be because he had 3 years invested in Hundley he wasn't being entirely truthful lol. The closest McCarthy came to throwing one of his players under the bus was when he said "Damarious needs to clean his own house" and now Randall is a Brown. MM might like Hundley as a person but adding Kizer clearly shows he isn't pleased with Brett's development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 Trade solved our backup QB problem. Won't deny that. Unfortunately, the backup QB position doesn't matter worth a quarter of a damn to a team as devoid of talent as this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannondale Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said: If somebody wants to tell me they like this trade making the following assumptions: 1. They value the backup QB position a lot. They think Rodgers will go down for a few games this year and we'll need a better backup QB than Hundley to compete for the playoffs. 2. They've evaluated Hundley and Kizer and come to the conclusion that Hundley is nothing and Kizer is going to be significantly better with potential to be QBOTF post Rodgers. 3. They believe that Randall was such a bad locker room influence that it cancelled out his contributions as a player relative to Josh Hawkins. If somebody believes all three of those things, I get liking this trade. I just don't believe any of those things. Here's the thing for me. None of those things are make or break. The only thing that matters is #3. Randall wasn't worth the guy they are planning to replace him with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 Just now, MantyWrestler said: I think 3. Carries a lot of weight here. Maybe the Packers aren’t planning on doling out another huge contract for Rogers either. Maybe they plan on letting him play this one out and seeing what happens then. Hard to imagine we're not talking about a franchise tag situation in year 3 barring his arm falling off if they don't resign him long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 Somebody make that one meme of the guy checking out the girl while walking with his girlfriend. Make the guy into Packer fans, make his girlfriend Gute and make the girl walking past Ted Thompson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinaski_86 Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 3 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: If somebody wants to tell me they like this trade making the following assumptions: 1. They value the backup QB position a lot. They think Rodgers will go down for a few games this year and we'll need a better backup QB than Hundley to compete for the playoffs. 2. They've evaluated Hundley and Kizer and come to the conclusion that Hundley is nothing and Kizer is going to be significantly better with potential to be QBOTF post Rodgers. 3. They believe that Randall was such a bad locker room influence that it cancelled out his contributions as a player relative to Josh Hawkins. If somebody believes all three of those things, I get liking this trade. I just don't believe any of those things. I don't believe in 1. We still don't have a backup QB that can lead this team should Rodgers go down. Without #12, our offense really isn't as talented as fans think it is. So maybe there's some truth in option 2 and 3. Maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, cannondale said: Here's the thing for me. None of those things are make or break. The only thing that matters is #3. Randall wasn't worth the guy they are planning to replace him with. And that's fine, but then give me the picks instead of Kizer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantyWrestler Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 Just now, AlexGreen#20 said: Hard to imagine we're not talking about a franchise tag situation in year 3 barring his arm falling off if they don't resign him long term. I totally agree. And at 37 maybe they sign him, maybe they trade him if he doesn’t like the tag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.