August 21, 2019, 11:51:21 AM

Author Topic: Safety?  (Read 3989 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline classicpack

  • Second String
  • **
  • Posts: 59
  • Karma: +0/-0
Safety?
« on: April 29, 2013, 09:15:09 AM »
What's your take?  Does TT sign a second tier safety in FA now for further depth backup?  Does he resign Woodson?  Does he move Locke to safety? (Do we finally cut Bush--not a safety question but wishful thinking).   Personally, I think he does nothing until after all mini camps are done.

Offline ThatGuy284

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 934
  • Karma: +3/-4
Re: Safety?
« Reply #1 on: April 29, 2013, 12:51:14 PM »
Culver, Peprah, Bigby and Martin are all out there for the taking... ;D

Offline Ellis269

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 572
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Safety?
« Reply #2 on: April 29, 2013, 02:57:51 PM »
The only guy left worth looking at is Kerry Rhodes. He'd be a good addition IMO.

Offline Pugger

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5324
  • Karma: +4/-1
Re: Safety?
« Reply #3 on: May 01, 2013, 10:15:03 AM »
The coaches must see something in Sean Richardson and Jerron McMillian to play opposite Burnett...
« Last Edit: May 01, 2013, 10:15:39 AM by Pugger »

Offline philepps85

  • All Pro
  • ****
  • Posts: 471
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Safety?
« Reply #4 on: May 01, 2013, 06:53:44 PM »
The only guy left worth looking at is Kerry Rhodes. He'd be a good addition IMO.

+1, but it's not gonna happen unless the holdovers stink up the preseason and he's still unsigned.

Offline Draft Hobbyist

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 743
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Safety?
« Reply #5 on: May 02, 2013, 07:27:20 AM »
I doubt a move is made.

Offline davekenya

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 506
  • Karma: +4/-0
Re: Safety?
« Reply #6 on: May 02, 2013, 06:54:32 PM »
Only 1 month until the June 1st cuts - let's see who surfaces then...

Online ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6000
  • Karma: +45/-20
Re: Safety?
« Reply #7 on: May 03, 2013, 08:32:38 AM »
Two possibilities, and perhaps both will come to pass. Hyde converted to safety. He has the size, and if he is a willing tackler near the line, being a CB coming out of college speaks well of his coverage ability. Another possibility is that the Packers reach out to Woodson for another year. No other team seems interested, and, since he would get a respectable though not large salary, he might be a consideration. I fully realize that Woodson offered to take a pay cut, but he'd have to be willing to come in for $2 million or so. If not, the Packers go with who they have. I'd be for bringing back Woodson simply because he could be an on field coach and mentor for the younger players.
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Offline Draft Hobbyist

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 743
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Safety?
« Reply #8 on: May 03, 2013, 04:20:59 PM »
Two possibilities, and perhaps both will come to pass. Hyde converted to safety. He has the size, and if he is a willing tackler near the line, being a CB coming out of college speaks well of his coverage ability. Another possibility is that the Packers reach out to Woodson for another year. No other team seems interested, and, since he would get a respectable though not large salary, he might be a consideration. I fully realize that Woodson offered to take a pay cut, but he'd have to be willing to come in for $2 million or so. If not, the Packers go with who they have. I'd be for bringing back Woodson simply because he could be an on field coach and mentor for the younger players.

I don't think the Packers would take Woodson back for the league minimum. He's old and slow, he's a penalty waiting to happen, and we would have to cut someone to make room for him that his younger and could develop.

Offline Nitschke

  • Rookie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Safety?
« Reply #9 on: January 06, 2014, 06:53:08 PM »
Looked up Woodsons stat line and he played in all 16 games 97 tackles solo & assist, 2 sacks, 3 forced fumbles, 2 fumble recoveries, and one INT.    MD Jennings had 74 combined tackles, 1 sack, and 1 forced fumble.  Don't know on cap numbers, but have to think Woodson' leadership/experience is worth any difference.  Didn't watch the Raiders once this year, so maybe I'm missing something, but really did not like losing him.

Online ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6000
  • Karma: +45/-20
Re: Safety?
« Reply #10 on: January 06, 2014, 09:27:09 PM »
There was consensus (if memory serves) that Woodson had (a) lost a step; (b) was not good in coverage anymore; (c) was too penalty prone; (d) was too old. Many were calling for younger players to step in and step up. Though Rodgers himself lobbied the team to keep Woodson.

Then again, lets say he'd have been switched to safety to play with Burnett? Would that have made sense? I remember this being a topic of discussion earlier, but, seriously, even if he was simply average, he'd have raised the bar at safety considerably.

Thanks for resurrecting this thread. Because now, the question of what to do at safety is still around. Bring in a veteran? The Texans tried that with Ed Reed, though you'd think they'd learned their lesson with Ahman Green. If TT signs anyone, expect it to be a second tier FA, a play of whom we've probably never heard. Because the Packers have a lot of FA's, and picking and choosing who to keep and at what price is going to mean making some real tough choices.
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5226
  • Karma: +40/-2
Re: Safety?
« Reply #11 on: January 07, 2014, 07:46:00 AM »
There was consensus (if memory serves) that Woodson had (a) lost a step; (b) was not good in coverage anymore; (c) was too penalty prone; (d) was too old. (e) He was too expensive at $10M and was too proud take a pay cut.
Many were calling for younger players to step in and step up. Though Rodgers himself lobbied the team to keep Woodson.

Then again, lets say he'd have been switched to safety to play with Burnett? Would that have made sense? I remember this being a topic of discussion earlier, but, seriously, even if he was simply average, he'd have raised the bar at safety considerably.

Thanks for resurrecting this thread. Because now, the question of what to do at safety is still around. Bring in a veteran? The Texans tried that with Ed Reed, though you'd think they'd learned their lesson with Ahman Green. If TT signs anyone, expect it to be a second tier FA, a play of whom we've probably never heard. Because the Packers have a lot of FA's, and picking and choosing who to keep and at what price is going to mean making some real tough choices.

Offline GBRoCk2

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 552
  • Karma: +4/-0
Re: Safety?
« Reply #12 on: January 15, 2014, 09:13:40 AM »
There was consensus (if memory serves) that Woodson had (a) lost a step; (b) was not good in coverage anymore; (c) was too penalty prone; (d) was too old. Many were calling for younger players to step in and step up. Though Rodgers himself lobbied the team to keep Woodson.

Then again, lets say he'd have been switched to safety to play with Burnett? Would that have made sense? I remember this being a topic of discussion earlier, but, seriously, even if he was simply average, he'd have raised the bar at safety considerably.

Thanks for resurrecting this thread. Because now, the question of what to do at safety is still around. Bring in a veteran? The Texans tried that with Ed Reed, though you'd think they'd learned their lesson with Ahman Green. If TT signs anyone, expect it to be a second tier FA, a play of whom we've probably never heard. Because the Packers have a lot of FA's, and picking and choosing who to keep and at what price is going to mean making some real tough choices.

I feel we have to bring in a veteran free agent, I believe some of the players in interviews even suggested this.

I've always liked Bernard Pollard, he would bring toughness to this team and has experience in a 3-4. If we address any position in free agency, I'd like it to be safety.

Offline Ellis269

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 572
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Safety?
« Reply #13 on: January 17, 2014, 10:57:47 PM »
Mike Mitchell - Carolina

Younger and better in coverage, but still brings that intimidation factor into the middle of the field. Should have gotten him last year when the position was a mess and nobody wanted him.

Offline golfman

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11870
  • Karma: +9/-1
Re: Safety?
« Reply #14 on: January 18, 2014, 04:18:43 AM »
Mike Mitchell - Carolina

Younger and better in coverage, but still brings that intimidation factor into the middle of the field. Should have gotten him last year when the position was a mess and nobody wanted him.

Interesting that this conversation is a repeat of 2013.

Funny but true, I didn't even know this section existed or ignored it because of our lack of involvment in free agency.
"Make the Packers Great Again! "