vegas492 Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 15 minutes ago, blankman0021 said: Would you give Randall his 5th year option guaranteeing his 2019 salary this May? Because that's the option the staff had to make by late spring. We either go all in - or make him a lame duck 4th year CB and eat crow if he has a good year going into FA. This was by far the best move we could have made with Randall. He had little trade value, and we moved up half a round twice and got a player who also has talent but little trade value. Kizer with 3 years on his deal is worth much more than Randall w/ 1 year even though Randall has shown more at the NFL level to this point. You used the term "lame duck", I'll use the term "contract year". Yah, I'd rather have Randall in a contract year than Kizer on the bench and the swapping of picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 Just now, deltarich87 said: We'll look back on this trade 3 yrs from now when Kizer is the starting QB* of the Green Bay Packers and Randall is on his 3rd team as a backup CB and laugh *Rodgers will be traded for young defensive stud and a boatload of draft picks I expect Randall to challenge for league lead in interceptions this season. Browns are going to use him at safety and at various places in that defense, and with a #1 overall pass rusher and an influx of other talent, Randall is going to make whoever demanded he be traded look bad. Kizer is going to be out of the league in 3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deltarich87 Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 4 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said: I expect Randall to challenge for league lead in interceptions this season. Browns are going to use him at safety and at various places in that defense, and with a #1 overall pass rusher and an influx of other talent, Randall is going to make whoever demanded he be traded look bad. Kizer is going to be out of the league in 3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kepler Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 Actually, I'll go ahead and predict next election cycle Randall and Kiser are on the green party ticket as president and v.p. candidates. When they win in a landslide we'll all realize no one saw the vast god-like potential of either. Amen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyecatcher Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 Wow. I tried to read this thread but after 20 pages of "Fire Gute" and "Gute is worse than Ted", I had to stop. I was concerned with the trade at first but actually like it now. Randall may have been a locker room cancer. How many of you didn't want to make a play for Peters because he was a head case? Randall had as many blow ups with the coaching staff as Peters did in 2017. Randall was solid and I liked him because he was a Packer but he wasn't great. The Packers improved their draft position and pick 1st on day 3. That's a plus. The Packers gained over a million in cap space. That's a plus. The Packers can get rid of Hundley. That's a plus. The knock on Kizer was his mental preparation. He has the tools to be a good QB but didn't prepare as well as he could. He is an improvement over Hundley despite comparing performances from last year. I respect the knowledge of many of the posters in here but man some of you went off the deep end on one move. Give it time. Real FA starts today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 55 minutes ago, Leader said: Exactly. Plus we got (what I believe at least.....) will be better talent to back up AR. And we're now drafting first in both the 4th and 5th rounds. Everybody keeps magnifying how many holes we've got to fit - well, in my mind at least drafting higher up is a good start towards doing that. Now - it comes down to eyes balls on the talent - and AGGRESSIVENESS to go get what we need. One thing I didnt like about GB procedure was we had an overall tendency to sit pat in the draft. Meaning, towards the bottom of the sea - waiting to see what would make its way down that we could eat (metaphorically speaking of course.....) - and I questioned - with all the departures from the scouting and personnel departments to other teams, I wondered about the quality of our talent evaluations. You could use these arguments to defend us trading anyone for anything though. We still have the draft, it's fine we traded Player X. We have FA. Doesn't mean we got equal value Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 7 minutes ago, NormSizedMidget said: You could use these arguments to defend us trading anyone for anything though. We still have the draft, it's fine we traded Player X. We have FA. Doesn't mean we got equal value I'm not trying to compare CB versus QB values. We need to replace DR. He's a talented guy - but with drawbacks. Every year we need to replace players. Seems we always survive somehow. Dont run the team so I cant say exactly how - but we do and I suspect we will again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, Leader said: I'm not trying to compare CB versus QB values. We need to replace DR. He's a talented guy - but with drawbacks. Every year we need to replace players. Seems we always survive somehow. Dont run the team so I cant say exactly how - but we do and I suspect we will again. Minus the attitude stuff, if we aren't considering that, then I disagree he "needed" to be replaced. And I am looking at value. That's how trades work. If you need to move on from a guy you should not take whatever for him just because you wanted to move on if you can get something more useful than you did. I can't be convinced that truly a backup project QB was the most useful thing for this team. Unless we now buy into Ted building for the future stuff... Which was hated 6 months ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 1 minute ago, NormSizedMidget said: Minus the attitude stuff, if we aren't considering that, then I disagree he "needed" to be replaced. And I am looking at value. That's how trades work. If you need to move on from a guy you should not take whatever for him just because you wanted to move on if you can get something more useful than you did. I can't be convinced that truly a backup project QB was the most useful thing for this team. Unless we now buy into Ted building for the future stuff... Which was hated 6 months ago One All Pro went for a 4th and future 2nd, one for a 5th, we got 4th round value and a lottery ticket QB that could turn into even higher picks, or at the very least gives us 3 more years of cheap backup QB play (which allows us to save a draft pick or 5m contract on one), we got market value for Randall, the notion we didn't needs to stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 1 minute ago, NormSizedMidget said: Minus the attitude stuff, if we aren't considering that, then I disagree he "needed" to be replaced. And I am looking at value. That's how trades work. If you need to move on from a guy you should not take whatever for him just because you wanted to move on if you can get something more useful than you did. I can't be convinced that truly a backup project QB was the most useful thing for this team. Unless we now buy into Ted building for the future stuff... Which was hated 6 months ago Alright. This is as if the washing machine is stuck on constant Rinse + Repeat cycle. I didnt say he needed to replaced - that was the organizations decision. I said they need to replace him. There's a difference. So - thats what we're setting out to do. Not unlike many years previous. Replacing a player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 Just now, eyecatcher said: The Packers gained over a million in cap space. No they didn't. Even if they had gained a million dollars, a million dollars is nothing out of 170 million dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 3 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said: No they didn't. Even if they had gained a million dollars, a million dollars is nothing out of 170 million dollars. They did gain around a 4th round pick worth of draft compensation and a nice young QB prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 Just now, Packerraymond said: They did gain around a 4th round pick worth of draft compensation and a nice young QB prospect. Late fifth round pick worth of draft compensation and the league-leading turnover machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 1 minute ago, HorizontoZenith said: Late fifth round pick worth of draft compensation and the league-leading turnover machine. For one of PFF's worst CBs in the NFL in 2016. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted March 12, 2018 Share Posted March 12, 2018 Just now, Packerraymond said: For one of PFF's worst CBs in the NFL in 2016. A site you claim is crap and a year Randall had a groin injury, which YOU said is an impossible injury to play through as a cornerback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.