March 22, 2019, 04:56:23 AM

Author Topic: Za'Darius Smith Agrees with Packers  (Read 1508 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
  • Karma: +38/-8
Re: Za'Darius Smith Agrees with Packers
« Reply #30 on: March 13, 2019, 07:46:01 AM »
Lets keep in mind that the signings are in addition to players the Packers already have on the roster. With Clark and Daniels still on the DL, the addition of Smith could be significant. Do they give Wlkerson another shot? He would probably be pretty cheap to retain. Drafting another pass rusher, either edge or LBer in the first would be another option, depending on how the draft unfolds. There is always that guy who was seen as a sure fire top five/top ten who falls. There will also be those last minute "gotcha" rumors/allegations that will impact a major prospect. There is always the possibility of trading one or even both of the first round picks. Everything is on the table, and expect the unexpected.
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Offline OneTwoSixFive

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2265
  • Karma: +12/-6
Re: Za'Darius Smith Agrees with Packers
« Reply #31 on: March 13, 2019, 07:51:57 AM »
Heck RT, I don't know where that stuff about Murphy comes from. I don't see that at all. What I do see is a guy who was a little slow on the trigger to sort out the GM and coach situation, and then doing what he thought was necessary to fix it. That wasn't ideal, but I can understand it from a traditionally conservative franchise.

All this ego stuff and undermining the organisation, I don't agree with that. I also think that the moves that have just been made are all Gute, not Murphy at all......and more than that, it suggests to me that if Russ Ball was too conservative when he held a lot of power (TTs final years), that control has shifted over to Gute. The big difference in veteran FA strategy is a strong indicator of that.
(ricky) "Personally, I'm putting this in a box, driving a stake through its heart, firing a silver bullet into its (empty) head, nailing it shut, loading it into a rocket and firing it into the sun. "

(Pink Floyd) "Set the controls for the heart of the sun"

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4933
  • Karma: +32/-2
Re: Za'Darius Smith Agrees with Packers
« Reply #32 on: March 13, 2019, 08:41:58 AM »
I guess I look at it from a different lense, RT.

Is Murphy involved in the personnel issues? Yes, because the HC, GM, and Cap Manager (Ball) all report to him from a communications standpoint.

Is Murphy the one pulling the strings on player acquisition? JMHO, but I don't think he's telling Gute and Ball who to sign and for how much, but I think he is giving his blessing to who/how much the deals are for, and that would be following the protocol...........again, JMHO.

If we look at the two Smith's and Amos, they have Mike Pettine fingerprints all over them as to the kinds/types of players he wants and needs to make his defense work the way he envisions it working.

Now, let's watch the draft and see if it addresses the offensive side of the ball in a manner that befits how MLF wants to reshape it into the "new age" offense that he wants to install.

Keeping eye's on Murphy to see if he is dithering with the draft will, possibly, more telling than yesterday was.

 hatsoff)

Offline The GM

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2582
  • Karma: +42/-4
Re: Za'Darius Smith Agrees with Packers
« Reply #33 on: March 13, 2019, 10:06:28 AM »
I dont think Murphy gets into the nuts and bolts of personnel.  He probably didnt know who these FA are.  It wouldnt surprise me if he told Gute and Ball to go out and get some players, but I dont think he micromanages the personnel guys.  Now if Gute wants to bring in a problem child like a Josh Gordon, Murphy would probably like to know that, but I think he stays out of it for the most part.  Hes got ribbon cutting ceremonies to attend and sled hills to build. JMO
« Last Edit: March 13, 2019, 10:09:06 AM by The GM »

Offline claymaker

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2991
  • Karma: +14/-1
Re: Za'Darius Smith Agrees with Packers
« Reply #34 on: March 13, 2019, 04:13:13 PM »
Some good responses here.

First, my concern is not about the individual players and if they are good or bad signings. All that will be determined over time, as some have pointed out. History is spotty on such signing be successful, but that is not the point of my posting.

I question who is behind them and what is the motive. This was discussed over a year ago when the structure was announced by Murphy, I believe craig that you and I debated it at that time. IMO, Murphy is a core problem in undermining the football people and them maximizing the success of the Packers. I had hope that he would step aside with the firing of MM, but he likes the taste of being the self-appointed owner of the Green Bay Packers and the power that comes with it. Sadly no one on the board seems to care, profits keep growing and for them that is what really matters. Murphy was a player labor rep when he was playing with the Redskins and has always voiced that the players should have more say. In his desire to empower players he has become an enabler to Rodgers and that currently is the number one issue standing in the way of the Packers being a successful organization. Has hiring a new coach helped in sending the team in the right direction? When Murphy had Rodgers call the new coach before hiring him to get his approval, well that should tells us all we need to know. The number one thing that will make the Packers contenders again is not signing a group of marginal players in free agency to 'make a splash to excite the fan base', it is empowering a coach to get Rodgers to just do his damn job. But that is more unlikely to happen today than it was a year ago. Any success that is currently achieved by the team on the field will be in spite of Murphy, not because of him.   

I would say you're stretching the truth here. While Murphy is only a representative for the team's shareholders, he acts as the owner and he can be replaced by the board. Do you really think they wouldn't have hired LaFleur if Rodgers said no? The fact you think the Packers aren't a successful organization is disappointing.

Why do you carry so much resentment towards Rodgers and Murphy? Green Bay is one of the most financially stable teams in the NFL, which is mostly due to Mark Murphy. I'm not entirely sure why we don't like the idea that the GM and HC report to Murphy. It's like people are assuming neither have any autonomy at all. If that were true it would be the most unattractive job in all of sports. I don't think anyone is suggesting the team's success will be because of Murphy.

They had 35+ million in cap space. What were you expecting them to do with that money? Obviously, they were going to make a splash in free agency. What about Smith and Smith and Amos makes them marginal players? Marginal, meaning they are average or could be easily replaced. My thinking is the exact opposite. When you say something like "not signing a group of marginal players in free agency" it contradicts your own point of "my concern is not about the individual players and if they are good or bad signings." You clearly have doubts about the individual players and clearly have a bias on the contracts, which you're using as an excuse to point the finger at Murphy. They weren't whimsical signings to please fans. They added players to positions in dire need of talent.

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2813
  • Karma: +42/-9
Re: Za'Darius Smith Agrees with Packers
« Reply #35 on: March 13, 2019, 05:29:36 PM »
Some good responses here.

First, my concern is not about the individual players and if they are good or bad signings. All that will be determined over time, as some have pointed out. History is spotty on such signing be successful, but that is not the point of my posting.

I question who is behind them and what is the motive. This was discussed over a year ago when the structure was announced by Murphy, I believe craig that you and I debated it at that time. IMO, Murphy is a core problem in undermining the football people and them maximizing the success of the Packers. I had hope that he would step aside with the firing of MM, but he likes the taste of being the self-appointed owner of the Green Bay Packers and the power that comes with it. Sadly no one on the board seems to care, profits keep growing and for them that is what really matters. Murphy was a player labor rep when he was playing with the Redskins and has always voiced that the players should have more say. In his desire to empower players he has become an enabler to Rodgers and that currently is the number one issue standing in the way of the Packers being a successful organization. Has hiring a new coach helped in sending the team in the right direction? When Murphy had Rodgers call the new coach before hiring him to get his approval, well that should tells us all we need to know. The number one thing that will make the Packers contenders again is not signing a group of marginal players in free agency to 'make a splash to excite the fan base', it is empowering a coach to get Rodgers to just do his damn job. But that is more unlikely to happen today than it was a year ago. Any success that is currently achieved by the team on the field will be in spite of Murphy, not because of him.   

I would say you're stretching the truth here. While Murphy is only a representative for the team's shareholders, he acts as the owner and he can be replaced by the board. Do you really think they wouldn't have hired LaFleur if Rodgers said no? The fact you think the Packers aren't a successful organization is disappointing.

Why do you carry so much resentment towards Rodgers and Murphy? Green Bay is one of the most financially stable teams in the NFL, which is mostly due to Mark Murphy. I'm not entirely sure why we don't like the idea that the GM and HC report to Murphy. It's like people are assuming neither have any autonomy at all. If that were true it would be the most unattractive job in all of sports. I don't think anyone is suggesting the team's success will be because of Murphy.

They had 35+ million in cap space. What were you expecting them to do with that money? Obviously, they were going to make a splash in free agency. What about Smith and Smith and Amos makes them marginal players? Marginal, meaning they are average or could be easily replaced. My thinking is the exact opposite. When you say something like "not signing a group of marginal players in free agency" it contradicts your own point of "my concern is not about the individual players and if they are good or bad signings." You clearly have doubts about the individual players and clearly have a bias on the contracts, which you're using as an excuse to point the finger at Murphy. They weren't whimsical signings to please fans. They added players to positions in dire need of talent.

"You clearly have doubts about the individual players and clearly have a bias on the contracts, which you're using as an excuse to point the finger at Murphy". Don't give up the day job, Sherlock Holmes you are not.

My concerns about the management structure are documented on this site 14 months ago when it was released to the public. My concerns remain the same today as they were 14 months ago. It is a counterproductive structure that promotes internal power struggles.   

Offline craig

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3643
  • Karma: +17/-1
Re: Za'Darius Smith Agrees with Packers
« Reply #36 on: March 13, 2019, 08:44:38 PM »
...My concerns about the management structure are documented on this site 14 months ago when it was released to the public. My concerns remain the same today as they were 14 months ago. It is a counterproductive structure that promotes internal power struggles.

This is true, RT expressed this concern from the beginning. 

That's a conviction, but I'm not sure that any of the FA activity provides evidence that Murphy is power-struggling versus Gute or LaFleur, though? 

A tangent thought is that LaFleur doesn't come across as a big ego-guy, or Gute either.  (I realize people can maybe present themselves one way in limited media appearances but be different inside the building.)  Gute seems confident.  I admit Gute and LaFleur have both come across to me as pretty sincere and humble, guys who may have a good way of disciplining their egos; guys who are very confident and competitive, but may also have good capacity for respecting other people and working within their own well-defined domains of responsibility. 

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4933
  • Karma: +32/-2
Re: Za'Darius Smith Agrees with Packers
« Reply #37 on: March 21, 2019, 04:13:01 PM »