Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Blake Griffin Slam Dunks: NBA Jam Style

Is Finley Right For the Packers?

Make no mistake. Jermichael Finley is a good tight end. But, is he a good fit for the Green Bay Packers? I would argue no. And here's why. At the beginning of 2010, Finley was turning heads around the league. He had emerged as Aaron Rodgers' favorite target and the inevitable comparisons to the great tight ends of the league like Tony Gonzalez were rampant. Rodgers was barely even throwing to anyone else. Then the unthinkable happened. Finley was out for the season which left the league wondering if the Packers weren't done for after the earlier loss of Grant. But then something magical happened, A-Rod discovered that he had at least 5 other targets that he could throw to with confidence, and the rest, as they say, is history. Fast forward to the beginning of this season. The Pack was riding higher than they possibly ever had. The newly crowned champs were bringing back the majority of their team and coaching staff (Thank you lock out!!!) and on top of that, they were bringing in the equivalent of 2 very high profile free agents in the form of Grant and Finley coming back from their injuries. As fans, we couldn't have asked for a better scenario to repeat. (Except for that little issue of losing Cullen Jenkins. Still hurts.) But the sky really did seem like it was the limit. There were some lingering questions however. How were the Packers going to fit Finley back into the game plan? Would Rodgers go back to throwing every other ball to him? Would that kill the momentum from last season? After Finley's performance against the Bears in week three, 3 TDs, 7 catches, 85 yds, the hope of keeping the winning formula was starting to fade. Finley treated us to our first YOTTO touchdown dance and it was widely reported that Finley had aspirations of becoming the highest paid TE in the league. It was becoming painfully apparent to us as fans that Finley was all about Finley and that sounded a lot less like a Packer and a lot more like an Eagle. But thankfully, that's where the Finley-centric offense stopped. The following week, Rodgers went right back to spreading the ball around and "hitting the open man." And true-to-form, the complaints from Finley came pouring in. So Finley wants to get PAID. Well, let's see if that is warranted. Finley currently is in the top five in one single glaring statistical category......DROPS. He has 8! This one statistic alone, I believe, warrants letting him go. But, maybe he makes up for it in other areas. Let's start with receptions. 17 tight ends have more than he does. 17! What about yards? Maybe he gets more yards. Okay, a little better, but still not in the top ten. What about YAC? Something the Packers offense pride's itself on. He averages 4. The Gronk is almost double that. Finley finally cracks the top ten in 1st downs and TDs, but take away that one good game he had in Chicago and he almost falls off the list. There's no consistency there. These are the numbers of a middling TE and not a premier guy. I know he's coming off an injury but he didn't break his hands! The talking heads still laude his "good hands" and it makes me crazy. Are they even watching him play? So my point is this, Finley, while not a bad tight end, is not worth locking him up to a long term, high end deal. I believe he is replaceable and if he can't catch passes from potentially the most acurate passer in the history of the game, they probably need to go look for someone who can. I really hope with Jennings out the last few games, Rodgers does not continue to trust Finley. That INT in the endzone last week was 100% on him! Let Finley block, and chip, and draw defenders, but PLEASE! Throw the ball to someone, anyone, else!!!

Poll
Should the Packers try to sign Jermichael Finley to a long term deal?
Yes
135 votes
No
123 votes

258 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 216 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

sign and trade

franchise tag and then traded for a 2nd rounder. I really doubt they will bring him back next year, but they also will not let him walk away with nothing in return either.

by Glenn'sYank13 on Dec 14, 2011 5:18 PM CST reply actions  

No.

Guys with his physical traits aren’t easy to come by and he can be a playmaker on the team. Better and easier to keep him around rather than a tag and trade which could just as easily blow up in a face.

by PackApologist on Dec 14, 2011 8:06 PM CST up reply actions  

I'll trust Aaron Rodgers' judgment of Finley much more than I trust yours, thank you very much

Aaron Rodgers loves having him around.

Random guy who has never commented or posted on the site doesn’t want him around.

I’ll side with Rodgers.

Angelo: Right….so anyways Jay, I’m sure you understand that we needed to make this move and I wanna wish you the best of luck.

Cutler: (Swoops bangs out of eyes by throwing his head back) Whatever, I don’t need this team or you.
/Leaves in a huff
//Writes bad poetry on his blog

Grossman: What the fuck is Wilford Brimley’s problem?

by Packers3485 on Dec 14, 2011 5:42 PM CST reply actions   1 recs

Random Guy

Ha ha! Touche! Should have mentioned, long time reader, first time poster. Still think he is problem though. And I have loved Rodgers since the second he took over for Brent in the Cowboys game back in 2007, but he is not perfect (maybe) and Finley is taking too many targets away from guys who can catch the freaking ball!

by GBPforlife on Dec 14, 2011 5:54 PM CST reply actions  

How is opening up our offense and creating headaches for defensive coordinators a problem?

I still don’t understand all of the Jermichael hate. I mean, last week he was only targeted once, how is that “taking too many targets away from guys who can catch the freaking ball?”

Oh and another thing… last year we went 10-6 (basically without Finley). This year we are 13-0 (probably going to go undefeated) WITH Finley.

SUPER BOWL CHAMPS

by Chief Oshkosh on Dec 14, 2011 6:05 PM CST up reply actions  

THIS...
Oh and another thing… last year we went 10-6 (basically without Finley). This year we are 13-0 (probably going to go undefeated) WITH Finley.

"Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser." - Vince Lombardi

by AdamA on Dec 14, 2011 6:07 PM CST up reply actions  

No...

It’s all because of Ryan Grant.

Oh and another thing… last year we went 10-6 (basically without Finley Grant). This year we are 13-0 (probably going to go undefeated) WITH FinleyGrant.

13-0
MattFlynn4StartingQB

by arodgb on Dec 14, 2011 6:26 PM CST up reply actions  

LOL

One game at a time...

by Jabooty on Dec 15, 2011 5:50 AM CST up reply actions  

Oh and another thing… last year we went 10-6 (basically without Finley). This year we are 13-0 (probably going to go undefeated) WITH Finley.


Shouldn’t that be without Finley and 15 other players?

I hope they keep Finley, unless he demands to be the highest paid TE and threatens to sit out if he isn’t, then I won’t be too upset if they send him packing. But saying “without Finely” is simplifying things way too much.

December, 7 1941 may be a day that lives in infamy, but December 6, 2011 is a day that will live in AWESOMENESS!!! The day I became part owner of the Green Bay Packers!

In Cheese We Trust

by Zundar on Dec 14, 2011 6:34 PM CST up reply actions  

Quote FAIL!

Oops, forgot to add the “/”…

December, 7 1941 may be a day that lives in infamy, but December 6, 2011 is a day that will live in AWESOMENESS!!! The day I became part owner of the Green Bay Packers!

In Cheese We Trust

by Zundar on Dec 14, 2011 6:35 PM CST up reply actions  

Wow…are you really implying that Finley is responsible for us being undefeated?

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 15, 2011 2:53 PM CST up reply actions  

We did lose once last year without Finley out there and Rodgers only threw for over 300 yards once last year with Finley on the field. The numbers from last year don’t support that Finley is the difference maker…they DO support that another season of progress in the offense, game plan, game calling, and pure execution are probably more responsible for us being unbeatable so far.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 15, 2011 3:02 PM CST up reply actions  

Really?

they DO support that another season of progress in the offense, game plan, game calling, and pure execution are probably more responsible for us being unbeatable so far.

So you think that w/o ANY offseason, the offense just got THAT much better by itself? Certainly Rodgers has stepped up his game this year, but the fact that they DO have Finley also supports the claim that he is playing a large role in the offense going from Very good last year to utterly UNstoppable this year. Clearly the truth lies somewhere in the middle… Don’t you think? Rodgers is playing on another level this year, not so much from late season to this year. Cuz last 2 regular and playoff games he was playing as well as this year or very, very close. Finleys presence certainly has helped Nelson too, not that Jordy didn’t finish strong. Gotta give Finley some credit! Not all, but certainly his share!

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 15, 2011 7:00 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Clearly the truth lies somewhere in the middle… Don’t you think? Rodgers is playing on another level this year, not so much from late season to this year. Cuz last 2 regular and playoff games he was playing as well as this year or very, very close. Finleys presence certainly has helped Nelson too, not that Jordy didn’t finish strong. Gotta give Finley some credit! Not all, but certainly his share!

Absolutely. That’s why I think we need to see if he regains his focus and makes the plays that he’s supposed to make. Clearly he has a positive impact on the offense, but if he makes all the catches as well, then the defenses plan for him AND can’t stop him.

In Every Climb and Place....

by PhoenicianPakFan on Dec 15, 2011 9:06 PM CST up reply actions  

My point was just that Finley is not THE reason we are what we are. He’s a piece of the puzzle but the team got better as the season went on last year and it continued into this year. Sure Finley being there helped but I don’t think it was anywhere near the impact that you do.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 19, 2011 10:34 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Finley has had a tough year, no doubt

but drop him (like so many of his passes lately)? I dunno about that… Let’s look at some other things the statline doesn’t say.

1. Finley is tough to defend. Like a lot of receiving tight ends capable of making big plays, Finley is a hard guy to put a body on and block out. Because of this, defenders have to be a little more circumspect when he’s out there and in this game one little step of hesitation will spring someone else. A lot of receivers have benefited from Finley’s presence for this reason.

2. A bad year does not make a bad player. Dallas Clark is tied for dropped passes with him (as someone pointed out to me elsewhere on this site). Should Indiana shuck him? Should Jacksonville ditch Marcedes Lewis because he hasn’t struck the right chemistry with Gabbert yet? He’s made some mistakes, but they’re correctible ones.

3. Know who else on the team drops a lot of passes but is still mustard? Donald Driver. What matters is performance when it counts, chemistry with the team and a willingness to not give up when you’re having a bad stretch. Driver hasn’t gotten the looks of seasons past, but when the team needs him, he shows up and has the kind of game he’s expected to have.

Jermichael ain’t going nowhere just yet. You’d have to make a damn compelling argument for that one to stick.

"Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser." - Vince Lombardi

by AdamA on Dec 14, 2011 6:03 PM CST reply actions  

Another thing that makes Finley so useful

He draws attention away from Jennings, Nelson, etc. Even as a decoy he’s an important piece of the offense.

"I'm here to talk about the economy today -- about the need to get four quarters of strong, consistent performance. That wasn't another Jay Cutler joke, I swear. It could be, but it's not."

by Kuhl on Dec 14, 2011 9:53 PM CST up reply actions  

Wow.

I am clearly outnumbered, which is cool. It’s great getting feedback from people who most likely have been rooting on the Pack for far more than my paltry 20 years or so. I guess I kind of failed to get my other point across that maybe is a bigger one in my mind. Finley’s attitude seems crappy. He comes across as a primadonna to me which doesn’t seem to fit well in this team’s chemistry. Of course, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. I just don’t want the Pack to pass up maybe an opportunity to shore up the D or the O-line just to make Finley the highest paid TE in the league. That just seems crazy to me.

by GBPforlife on Dec 14, 2011 6:16 PM CST reply actions  

He never said he wanted to be the highest paid TE in the league

Those comments were blown way out of proportion. If I asked you, “would you like to be the highest paid __________”, what would you say? You would say yes, of course, because everyone wants to get paid in the NFL. Your contract (there are some exceptions), is generally a reflection of your production to the team.
Anyways, I think its safe to say that Jermichael Finley is as responsible for this perfect season and Rodgers breaking all these records as any player on the Packers. He provides a matchup nightmare like no other player on the Packers. If you watch some tape…. You can clearly see the safeties shielded to Finley, and they almost always double team him inside the redzone. When he’s not, Rodgers usually throws to him, and he usually catches the touchdown. Has he had some drops? Sure. But its not fair to make comments like…

Rodgers was barely even throwing to anyone else. Then the unthinkable happened. Finley was out for the season which left the league wondering if the Packers weren’t done for after the earlier loss of Grant. But then something magical happened, A-Rod discovered that he had at least 5 other targets that he could throw to with confidence, and the rest, as they say, is history
when Rodgers actually didn’t have that great of a season [till the last stretch of 7 games or so]. I could argue that our defense won us quite a few games last year.
And finally, please break up that block of text. You’ll get more responses if you do, and it does wonders for readability.

13-0
MattFlynn4StartingQB

by arodgb on Dec 14, 2011 6:43 PM CST up reply actions  

My neighbor

Ran track with Finley and the dude is a freak. I watched him at UT and he was rarely used to his potential. He comes off as cocky and needy but in all honesty he is just straight forward. He’s not very guarded and has loose lips. EVERYBODY wants to get paid, you can’t fault the kid for that. He is still young, so no worries. Top Tight ends will only make 5-6 mil next year anyways. He is definately worth that.

"Football isn't a contact sport, it's a collision sport. Dancing is a contact sport."

by dieapack on Dec 14, 2011 7:39 PM CST up reply actions  

Finley fits in just fine.

In fact MORE than fine. Theres not a player on the roster that doesn’t like Finley or love his competitive attitude. If you don’t like a player being a little outspoken, thats your perogative, but a primadonna he is not! He comes to work every day, practices as hard or harder than anyone and is highly respected by his teammates and coaches alike. So he has something to say and isn’t afraid to say it… BIG deal. Finley brings something to the team, that IMO, makes the team a little more interesting, and if they didn’t have him the team would be pretty bland! Finley keeps the fires stoked, doesn’t get in any trouble works his ass of and is a terrific talent. What is NOT to like about that? Finley is this teams version of LeRoy Butler!

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 14, 2011 8:06 PM CST up reply actions  

The thing about the attitude

That seems to be the common beef with Finley. The thing about it is that he’s not really a drama queen like we typically think about, it’s just that his mouth moves faster than his brain. He’s a young cocky guy who says things that he shouldn’t say sometimes…..but every team needs a guy like that. Guys like that help give that cocky swagger for a team and once they learn how to control that become a big asset.

The other thing to consider is that he hasn’t really caused controversy or said things that weren’t true. More often than not those hot headed comments turn out to be pretty darn accurate. Like how he said the Packers were going to Dallas last year, how we should go to Indy this year and how this offense should be expected to score every time they have the ball.

by PackApologist on Dec 14, 2011 8:11 PM CST up reply actions  

. Finley’s attitude seems crappy. He comes across as a primadonna to me which doesn’t seem to fit well in this team’s chemistry.

And your evidence for this is……? He’s clearly hurt the team’s chemistry so much, that they’re the most dangerous offense in the league, setting Packers offensive records, and on path to set every winning streak record in the league.

Man, just think what their chemistry would be like without him! We’d probably be scoring 100 per game!

Angelo: Right….so anyways Jay, I’m sure you understand that we needed to make this move and I wanna wish you the best of luck.

Cutler: (Swoops bangs out of eyes by throwing his head back) Whatever, I don’t need this team or you.
/Leaves in a huff
//Writes bad poetry on his blog

Grossman: What the fuck is Wilford Brimley’s problem?

by Packers3485 on Dec 14, 2011 6:19 PM CST reply actions  

Too be fair, his attitude has seemed iffy at points. Particularly, some of the comments he made after the Broncos game came off as pretty conceded. Though, that seemed to have gotten worked out.

I think it’s a stretch to say it’s hurt team chemistry though.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Dec 14, 2011 10:47 PM CST up reply actions  

*Conceited

Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
Whatever holds the image of an angel IS an angel. The eyes are not the windows of the soul, they are the doors.
Yes, I am on twitter.

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Dec 15, 2011 2:09 PM CST up reply actions  

I noticed that, too

I just wasn’t a big enough dick to point it out. Almost, though.

13.

by Wiedmann on Dec 15, 2011 2:33 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Close enough.

Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
Whatever holds the image of an angel IS an angel. The eyes are not the windows of the soul, they are the doors.
Yes, I am on twitter.

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Dec 15, 2011 3:35 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Haha my bad. My big post down below had a number of errors to when I read through it. The all nighter in the library did not treat me well last night.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Dec 15, 2011 2:46 PM CST up reply actions  

Totally understand.

This Sunday is not going to be kind. Finals at 8 AM on Monday? FFFFFUUUUUUUUUUU-

Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog, and Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog
Whatever holds the image of an angel IS an angel. The eyes are not the windows of the soul, they are the doors.
Yes, I am on twitter.

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Dec 15, 2011 3:36 PM CST up reply actions  

That sucks. I’ve got 3 on Saturday — wait wot!?

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Dec 15, 2011 9:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Screw you jerks.

I just finished my semester yesterday.

Packers: Working on a dynasty.
Blackhawks: Taking care of business as usual.
Badgers:Back-to-back B1G Champions!
Brewers: Move along, nothin' to see here.

by Tepo6688 on Dec 16, 2011 12:36 AM CST up reply actions  

Lucky but I don’t wanna hear about it haha!

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Dec 16, 2011 1:04 PM CST up reply actions  

Screw you jerks

I finished my semester three years ago.

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 16, 2011 1:20 PM CST up reply actions  

BIG BLOCK OF TEXT RABBLE RABBLE

CUT FINLEY RABBLE RABBLE
CUT RODGERS RABBLE RABBLE

13-0
MattFlynn4StartingQB

by arodgb on Dec 14, 2011 6:22 PM CST reply actions   1 recs

RODGERS HAS BEEN THROWING INTERCEPTIONS LATELY

CUT HIM!!!!!!!

Angelo: Right….so anyways Jay, I’m sure you understand that we needed to make this move and I wanna wish you the best of luck.

Cutler: (Swoops bangs out of eyes by throwing his head back) Whatever, I don’t need this team or you.
/Leaves in a huff
//Writes bad poetry on his blog

Grossman: What the fuck is Wilford Brimley’s problem?

by Packers3485 on Dec 14, 2011 6:22 PM CST up reply actions  

RODGERS 7 INTERCEPTIONS

MATT FLYNN 1 INTERCEPTION
BRETT FAVRE 0 INTERCEPTIONS
WHAT’S GOING ON HERE?

13-0
MattFlynn4StartingQB

by arodgb on Dec 14, 2011 6:24 PM CST up reply actions  

Solar Flares

Sunspots, whatever you wish to call them.

Rumor has it that Texas is about to sign a huge corporate sponsorship deal for the Longhorn Network. They just have to decide which brand represents them best: Dyson, Eureka or Hoover.

by It'sTheVoice on Dec 14, 2011 6:51 PM CST up reply actions  

So funny....

I almost had grasshopper coming outta my nose!

by bnbfishin on Dec 14, 2011 8:09 PM CST up reply actions  

Time to round up the posse...

and head out to Mississippi to get ready for the playoffs!

*Soon-to-be Packers shareholder*
With my last breath, I curse Zoidberg!

by RaY210 on Dec 15, 2011 12:01 AM CST via mobile up reply actions   2 recs

LLOLLL

13-0
MattFlynn4StartingQB

by arodgb on Dec 15, 2011 4:42 PM CST up reply actions  

As I said above I hope we keep him, if reasonable.

He clearly helps the team even when not getting many balls thrown his way. I’m not a fan of his attitude, but that is mainly from the whole Team Photo issue from the Super Bowl last year, for some reason that really pissed me off. I also really wish players would be like Rodgers and stay off Twitter during the season. I know he’s not the only player on the team that loves to tweat.

By reasonable I mean that he isn’t paid so much that it prevents other moves, but I don’t see TT and Co. doing that. If he does leave for some reason I’ll just remember that we won the Super Bowl without him last season and that things go on.

December, 7 1941 may be a day that lives in infamy, but December 6, 2011 is a day that will live in AWESOMENESS!!! The day I became part owner of the Green Bay Packers!

In Cheese We Trust

by Zundar on Dec 14, 2011 6:48 PM CST reply actions  

As someone who's watched Finley since his college days

I wouldn’t want to ditch him yet. He can certainly be a dangerous weapon.

Rumor has it that Texas is about to sign a huge corporate sponsorship deal for the Longhorn Network. They just have to decide which brand represents them best: Dyson, Eureka or Hoover.

by It'sTheVoice on Dec 14, 2011 6:53 PM CST reply actions  

Welcome to the party!

Looks like we’ve got two first time commenter-dudes here… [one who wants to cut Finley], but welcome nonetheless.

13-0
MattFlynn4StartingQB

by arodgb on Dec 14, 2011 6:54 PM CST up reply actions  

Just don't call the guy A-Rod

Jermichael Finley is not going anywhere. He is one of the building blocks of this franchise, along with Rodgers, Jennings, Jordy, James Jones, and hopefully Colb and Starks. His value to this team will be seen if people have some patience. Let’s not forget this will be his first full season. Finley has had some drops but he is crucial to the passing game. Rodgers knows that, and TT knows that too.

Both the Packers GM and Finley know that a lot of crazy money was thrown to average TEs last year (Boss and Miller), so it’s understandable to feel underpaid. Finley is not getting that kind of money, but he will wisely choose to stay, especially after being crowned back to back champ. I am sure TT will work out some sort of deal to keep everyone happy. Despite minor setbacks this year, JF is on the way to becoming a top 5 TE in NFL.

by Rodgers_for_MVP on Dec 14, 2011 7:15 PM CST reply actions  

I like him, but maybe we shouldn't bring him back

Someone far above me mentioned a sign-and-trade (Glenn’s Yank13), I’m not sure how that works in the NFL but if we can do it, I’m down. But I think we might have to use some money on a defensive player rather than Finley.

Not going to say Finley isn’t valuable or anything, but we did win the SB without him and he hasn’t been as much a factor this season as I expected. DJ Williams and Quarless are both waiting in the wings and Thompson finds TEs like squirrels find acorns. I’d rather spend a contract on a defensive player where we need help, rather than on offense where we won’t miss much besides a few spectacular catches where he splits the field down the seam (not many TEs can do that). Overall I don’t see our offense really missing a beat without Finley.

Montee Ball for Heisman.
Tajh Boyd and Dre' Ellington are the future.

by BlackPack-fan on Dec 14, 2011 7:31 PM CST reply actions  

No

But our offense will still be almost unstoppable, scoring 30+ ppg on a consistent basis as long as Rodgers is healthy (and Jenings and Nelson). Finely is a good player, I like him, but he’s a luxury on offense. We need help on defense, so I would rather spend money on resignign Clay/Raji or signing a playmaker at OLB across from Clay before spending money on Finley. I’m looking at priorities.

And not to mention, Quarless was only a rookie when he started for the SB team. Next year will be his 3rd, he could break out, and Williams has looked good.

Montee Ball for Heisman.
Tajh Boyd and Dre' Ellington are the future.

by BlackPack-fan on Dec 14, 2011 9:45 PM CST up reply actions  

Our offense wasn't unstoppable last year

How can you be so sure it would be next year without Finley? I think some people are severely underestimate what defenses have to do to account for Finley.

I’ll probably be wrong, but I think this offense could definitely look much worse in the coming weeks with Jennings. While teams will still pay just as much attention to Finley as they have been, now the extra pair of eyes that were on Jennings will be able to focus on Nelson/Driver/Jones/Cobb.

Thankfully, we get to play two crappy teams these next two weeks, so it probably won’t be anything to worry about in those games.

Angelo: Right….so anyways Jay, I’m sure you understand that we needed to make this move and I wanna wish you the best of luck.

Cutler: (Swoops bangs out of eyes by throwing his head back) Whatever, I don’t need this team or you.
/Leaves in a huff
//Writes bad poetry on his blog

Grossman: What the fuck is Wilford Brimley’s problem?

by Packers3485 on Dec 14, 2011 10:21 PM CST up reply actions  

Ugh, so many errors

That second paragraph should be “…..in the coming weeks with Jennings out”

Angelo: Right….so anyways Jay, I’m sure you understand that we needed to make this move and I wanna wish you the best of luck.

Cutler: (Swoops bangs out of eyes by throwing his head back) Whatever, I don’t need this team or you.
/Leaves in a huff
//Writes bad poetry on his blog

Grossman: What the fuck is Wilford Brimley’s problem?

by Packers3485 on Dec 14, 2011 10:23 PM CST up reply actions  

And by "the offense could look much worse"

I still think it will be better than 90% of the offenses in the league. But I don’t think it will look unstoppable in next few weeks

Angelo: Right….so anyways Jay, I’m sure you understand that we needed to make this move and I wanna wish you the best of luck.

Cutler: (Swoops bangs out of eyes by throwing his head back) Whatever, I don’t need this team or you.
/Leaves in a huff
//Writes bad poetry on his blog

Grossman: What the fuck is Wilford Brimley’s problem?

by Packers3485 on Dec 14, 2011 10:24 PM CST up reply actions  

Rodgers was not as good last year as he is now

to me, that’s a bigger factor in the offensive improvement than Finley being back (although I do agree that Finley is still a very important part of the offense)

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 14, 2011 11:48 PM CST up reply actions  

Ron Wolf

Once said his greatest mistakes was not giving Favre enough weapons. But your OK w/ Thompson, who has given Rodgers weapons, now taking one of the 2 biggest weapons out of the offense? I don’t see how that makes any sense at all… DJ Williams and Quarless don’t pose the HUGE matchup nitemare that Finley does. Neither would command a double team at any time. Quarless lacks Finley’s overall athleticism, even tho his straigth speed might be better. And WIlliams is the same size as the LB he would face and might not be much faster. Both are good role players, but neither is ever going to be doubled by a D Coordinator.

On top of that think about the trickle down effect Finley’s absence would have on the WR. Jennings would be seeing double teams every down w/o question, no matter the CB on the opposition. And Jordy would start seeing double teams on a regular basis, instead of the steady diet of nickel CB he is facing now. Losing Finley would have a very palpable impact on the offense.

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 15, 2011 3:38 AM CST up reply actions   3 recs

See what your saying

Your right that Finley is more of a matchup problem than Quarless and Williams. But I think they both have good cielings, and will both be above-average starters in this league. I don’t think the effect on the WRs would be all that big as long as Quarless and Williams get better like I expect. They are both athletic enough that they could beat a LB one on one if team swant to double team Nelson or Jennings.

But like I said earlier, the best case scenario is to resign Finley and have enough $$$ to spend on defense, mainly resigning Clay/Raji. But if there isn’t enough money and Finely isn’t willing to take a pay cut, he might have to be let go.

Montee Ball for Heisman.
Tajh Boyd and Dre' Ellington are the future.

by BlackPack-fan on Dec 15, 2011 12:54 PM CST up reply actions  

"mainly resigning Clay/Raji."

Their contracts run until 2014. They’re not really a priority in terms of contracts. Here are the defensive UFAs whose contracts expire before those two:
After ’11 season:
Howard Green ($765k), Erik Walden ($555k), Jarrett Bush ($1.4mil), Pat Lee ($555k)
After ’12 season:
Jarius Wynn ($565k), Brad Jones ($565k), Charlie Peprah ($1mil)

Offensive UFAs:
After ’11 season:
Matt Flynn ($555k), Ryan Grant ($2.5mil), Jermichael Finley ($1.2mil), Scott Wells ($2.75mil)
After ’12 season:
Greg Jennings ($3.885mil), Donald Driver ($2.6mil), TJ Lang ($1.308mil), Evan Deitrich-Smith ($565k), Chad Clifton ($5.25mil)

As you can see, there’s really not a whole lot of high-profile FAs in the next couple of years. The 4 defensive players who are up after this year would be nice to keep for depth, but I would prefer if none of them would be starting. Walden, the only one currently starting, should be upgraded in the upcoming draft. On offense, Wells & Finley are priorities, of which Finley would be cheaper, and if we could only re-sign one, I would prefer Finley.

The next year is pretty much the same deal on defense; guys who are nice for depth, but hardly essential. On offense, Clifton/Driver will most likely retire (probably before the contract expires), and only Jennings is a top priority (and to a lesser extent, Lang). Add in the fact that veteran contracts will be replaced by rookie contracts (~$800k → ~$400k) & Pickett’s escalating contract will probably be replaced by someone much younger & cheaper, and the cap doesn’t appear to be too much of an issue going forward. I understand the want to keep the young nucleus together, but we basically already have that accomplished.

13.

by Wiedmann on Dec 15, 2011 3:48 PM CST up reply actions  

Quarless and Williams

IMO, are never going to be anything other than role players! Has Quarless improved over last season? Blocking, sure… But not as a recieving target. I don’t see any reason a DC would do anything other than cover Williams w/ a LB. I would take my chances w/ that all day every day.

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 15, 2011 8:21 PM CST up reply actions  

there's no way of knowing if he's improved as a receiver

he had hardly any opportunities when he was healthy, he was blocked by Finley who’s obviously better

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 15, 2011 8:59 PM CST up reply actions  

I'd like to see these two (aprticularly Williams) after a(nother) full offseason....

I think they will get better than they are and especially if Finley was let go. But I also doubt they would ever be as good as Finley can be.

In Every Climb and Place....

by PhoenicianPakFan on Dec 15, 2011 9:08 PM CST up reply actions  

I'm with you and the poster on this....to an extent.

If this is all we are going to get from him, then yeah. He’ll probably demand more money on the market than he’s worth and we could let him go. We won’t replace his skill set with one of the TEs on our current roster but it wouldn’t make sense to pay him that much either.

He was growing into the best TE in the league 2 years ago, and was on pace to continue going into last year before he got injured. Now this year he isn’t even probably in the Top 3 or maybe even Top 5. Certainly Gronk and Graham are ahead of him. So what happened. I think he’s lost a bit of his edge and focus (the drops are evidence of this). He’s also pulling more attention from the opposing defenses but so are the main TEs I mentioned above and they are still winning those battles consistently. Honestly, he didn’t impress me the way he played that pick last week. He didn’t go after the ball and it fell into the defenders hands (and the defender wasn’t even looking at it). He just doesn’t seem to be as vicious this year.

In Every Climb and Place....

by PhoenicianPakFan on Dec 14, 2011 11:03 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

He’s also pulling more attention from the opposing defenses but so are the main TEs I mentioned above and they are still winning those battles consistently.

My guess is Gronkowski and Graham’s production will slow down quite a bit next year. They’re both relatively new on the scene. Finley in 2009 became starter but I think that was kind of a period for us to figure out what we had in him. Plus, some injuries slowed him down to as I think he missed 4 or 5 games. His “break out” year was going to be 2010, imo. He had 300 yards through 4 games and 1 TD. Based on how much Rodgers was targeting him and his averages up to that point of his injury, I think it’s safe to assume he’d have had 1,000+ yards and 6+ TD’s. I think teams saw how dangerous he is, and vowed this year not to not let him beat them. I think teams will definitely do things against both Gronk and Graham to slow them down more. Probably Graham more so than Gronk though, because NE’s TE friendly system seems awfully hard to stop.

My theory is that teams realize Driver is slowing down. They recognize Jennings is very good , as well as Finley. It seems like most teams strategy has been to double Jennings and Finley, and find out whether or not Nelson/Jones could beat them.

That’s just my personal opinion though. And I think another factor is how many weapons we’ve got. I think sometimes we’re content with using Finley as a decoy to open up other things. I think there’s probably things that could be done to free up Finley more but why do them when you’ve got the guys to beat it anyway? (I think some of Finley’s, as well as McCarthy’s comments support this too.)

If we do keep him, my guess is the big stats will eventually come. I’m sure teams will look at this season and say, “Well shit, if we don’t put a safety over Nelson, he’s going to beat us deep.”

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Dec 14, 2011 11:29 PM CST up reply actions  

No doubt they do but they’ve only got 2-3 days to do so. In the offseason they’ll be much more time for them look at ways to slow them down. It’s something that usually happens to every play after a breakout year.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Dec 15, 2011 1:04 PM CST up reply actions  

That could be...

I work with a Pats fan and we both agree that Gronk is probably the best all-around TE right now. That includes blocking and such. NE probably has the best TE position in the NFL only because they have 2 legitimate playmakers playing at the same time.

In Every Climb and Place....

by PhoenicianPakFan on Dec 15, 2011 2:33 AM CST up reply actions  

Gronk is unbelievable

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 15, 2011 7:26 AM CST up reply actions  

I agree he’s the best overall — hands down.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Dec 15, 2011 1:02 PM CST up reply actions  

I can see both sides of the fence from what’s been said here and from what I’ve seen of Finley’s play.Hell I’ve also mentioned this on another post in the past. I wouldn’t be hartbroken if he left GB.

by bnbfishin on Dec 14, 2011 8:12 PM CST reply actions  

What the Hell

In football, and in life, the most difficult thing to obtain and maintain is perspective, and not necessarily your own. Finley came to the Packers as a very young, very raw mid-rounder. I’ll tell you what I know. I have never heard anyone in the Packer family say anything bad about Finley, including McCarthy who finds him “refreshing”. Rodgers has on several occassions tried to make it clear that Finley is a team player. Next, it is well documented how hard the guy works at his craft. Finally, even when he isn’t directly involved in the action, he’s positively contributing down field and in blocking. Other teams, like Jennings, must account for Finley. He does not dog plays. Those are the facts. Here is my opinion. Finley is going though a lapse of confidence right now. We know he can catch the ball. No reason not to think it’s anything more then what every athlete goes through from time to time. Ergo, getting rid of Finley would be idiotic.

by marcopo on Dec 14, 2011 8:57 PM CST reply actions  

One of the traits McCarthy has, is his vigilance of all things lockerroom. And while, he’s not a chatterbox like Rex Ryan, he doesn’t lie or mislead when he does make statements. It’s been suggested (mild form) that Finley is a diva and a selfish unpackerlike individual. That has come from some of the stuff he says on twitter, then, as usual, blown out of proportion by the media. Many Packer fans, in their zeal, would like all Packers to be church going robots who always tow the perceived partyline. While I understand it, it is unrealistic, and unfair. Finleys teammates have always defended and praised him. That is good enough for me.

by marcopo on Dec 14, 2011 9:10 PM CST up reply actions   2 recs

Short answer: Yes.

Long answer: YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSS!

But format please, otherwise people may go…

But since I am a good dude…

That dog just won't hunt.

by Bush League All Star on Dec 14, 2011 10:12 PM CST reply actions  

Lol...

Thanks BLAS. Never knew what tl;ra meant.

*Soon-to-be Packers shareholder*
With my last breath, I curse Zoidberg!

by RaY210 on Dec 15, 2011 12:14 AM CST via mobile up reply actions  

Basically...

TL;DR = Too long; didn’t read

But I am a good guy and help out by offering pro-tips. It really isn’t all that long. Probably should have went for WALL OF TEXT HITS YOU FOR 1000 DAMAGE.

That dog just won't hunt.

by Bush League All Star on Dec 15, 2011 12:19 AM CST up reply actions  

Oh yeah!

I knew it was tl; and some other letters lol. And no it wasn’t. It’s just when you see it, it just smacks you in the face. So yeah, that probably was a better one to go with

*Soon-to-be Packers shareholder*
With my last breath, I curse Zoidberg!

by RaY210 on Dec 15, 2011 12:31 AM CST via mobile up reply actions  

Yes, we should.

It seems lots of people have been all of Finley lately and I don’t totally understand it. I know he hasn’t been as active in the offense but it’s no secret that Rodgers likes to spread the ball around. He also doesn’t throw it to someone when he thinks they’re covered (for the most part anyway it seems). From what I’ve seen Finley is very rarely not double teamed, and when teams play zone it seems like they tend to focus a lot of attention on him. A couple examples of this come to mind — the TD pass to Jennings against the Broncos where 3 defenders run to Finley and left Jennings wide open and the TD pass to Driver where the safety and underneath linebacker ran with Finley leaving Driver wide open.

He’s getting a ton of attention and Rodgers is taking advantage of it. It’s meant many single teams for Nelson and he has more than taken advantage of them. I can’t help but think that part of the offense being unstoppable this season is Finley’s return. I think Rodgers excellence is the main factor but having Finley back makes it hard for teams to slow down all our weapons.

On his hands — I’d still say they’re good. This is the first season he’s had problems with his catching. This is totally off memory and could be wrong but I think I recall Brandon posting a statistic from Football Outsiders about just reliable his hands had been (in 2009 and 2010).

And by the way, I think you make some valid points in your post. I don’t think it’s write to simply ignore what you had to say because you’re a new poster.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Dec 14, 2011 10:12 PM CST reply actions  

You're right about the way he spreads the ball around...

He takes what the defense gives him. He rarely forces it to receivers, which, when teams double Finley, is the reason he usually looks at other targets

*Soon-to-be Packers shareholder*
With my last breath, I curse Zoidberg!

by RaY210 on Dec 15, 2011 12:24 AM CST via mobile up reply actions  

I have complete faith that TT will ultimately make the right decision on what to do with Finley

whatever he decides to do, I’m 100% in agreement with it.

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 14, 2011 11:53 PM CST reply actions   1 recs

This!

I would love to keep Finley. But we don’t know what is or isn’t going on in the contact meetings, and if TT thinks it’s best to let him go, then I guess his time in GB is up.

*Soon-to-be Packers shareholder*
With my last breath, I curse Zoidberg!

by RaY210 on Dec 15, 2011 12:27 AM CST via mobile up reply actions  

It's all about the money

Finley is going to want an expensive contract and that money can be spent better elsewhere for us. Plus, I honestly think D.J. Williams is going to turn into a heck of a recieving option, not to mention Quarless has show flashes of greatness as a reciever. I also don’t think his flashy, “look at me” personality on the field is a good fit with the team. He’ll catcha first down, get up and celebrate and then drop the next 2 balls.

by SoCal19 on Dec 15, 2011 12:41 AM CST reply actions  

an expensive contract for a TE isn't that much.

Personally, I’ll take a premier TE over a solid player at another position. Franchise tags are calculated based on the average of the top 5 salaries:

QB: $16,405,000
DE: $12,398,000
T/G/C: $10,731,000
LB: $9,680,000
CB: $9,566,000
WR: $9,521,000
RB/FB: $8,156,000
DT: $7,003,000
S: $6,455,000
TE: $5,908,000
K/P: $2,814,000

Having one of the best at the position for less than $6 mil sounds all right to me.

13.

by Wiedmann on Dec 15, 2011 1:44 AM CST up reply actions  

And even if he argues that he's a WR

which ESPN reported he may do, I’d probably slot him around $7-8 mm. That’s not bad for one of the best play makers in the NFL.

"I'm here to talk about the economy today -- about the need to get four quarters of strong, consistent performance. That wasn't another Jay Cutler joke, I swear. It could be, but it's not."

by Kuhl on Dec 15, 2011 1:17 PM CST up reply actions  

We need more help on defense.

We need to spend our money finding a pass rusher opposite Clay matthews. The reason were getting torched through the air this year is the loss of Cullen Jenkins and the lack of a pass rush. Defense wins championships and I don’t think we’ll be able to make it through another year with our defense the way it is. Finley is luxury right now, not a need. Yeah, he may be better than Qualress and Williams, but the money he will command won’t out weigh the direct correlation to wins he provides. Yeah if we are able to franchise him at $6 Million next year go for it.

by SoCal19 on Dec 15, 2011 2:23 PM CST up reply actions  

We need to spend our money finding a pass rusher opposite Clay matthews.

And how should we do that? We generally don’t pick up big name free agents. This leads me to believe we get an OLB through the draft (and if that’s the case, that player will be relatively cheap)

SUPER BOWL CHAMPS

by Chief Oshkosh on Dec 15, 2011 3:02 PM CST up reply actions  

Okay, Dan Snyder
We need to spend our money finding a pass rusher opposite Clay matthews.

How about we find a good one in the draft & pay him the rookie wage scale?

13.

by Wiedmann on Dec 15, 2011 3:50 PM CST up reply actions  

Yeah how did that work out with Mike Neal?

I’d be happy with Robert Mathis, Kory Bierman, Jason Hunter, Cliff Avril or Calais Campbell at DE, but we would become unstoppable if we went out and signed Mario Williams to play ROLB.

by SoCal19 on Dec 17, 2011 11:20 AM CST up reply actions  

It might still work out

I didn’t realize if you signed someone as a FA they are invincible & impossible to injure.

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 17, 2011 12:37 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Non of the guys you mentioned...

Other than Campbell has ever played in a 34 D. Mathis would have to learn to be a balanced player, not just a pass rusher, not to mention learn to play standing up and in space.

Campbell is set to become a FA, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see the Cards slap the franchise tag on him. He’s arguably their best defensive player and for a team that needs more talent, losing him would be incredibly stupid. Non of the rest, other than Super Mario is an impact player, and Houston isn’t going to let him walk!

Didn’t we release Jason Hunter the year Capers took over the D?… Bierman and Avril are 43 DL and would face a learning curve, so might not make an impact very quickly.

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 17, 2011 12:59 PM CST up reply actions  

And this
so might not make an impact very quickly

is the most common problem with most free agents, anyway.

Because of that thing known as ‘chemistry’, even if they aren’t making such a transition.
See the Redskins since Dan Snyder bought them.
See the Eagles this year.

Sheesh. When are people going to quit saying that Ted Thompson should sign free agents, already?!?

"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

"We're nobody's underdog!"

"We don't play scared!"

by NorthStarr on Dec 17, 2011 2:57 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

No kidding...

Sheesh. When are people going to quit saying that Ted Thompson should sign free agents, already?!?

You would think they understand by now that our offseasons are going to be pretty quiet. Signing FA just isn’t his way, and personally I’m more than fine w/ that!

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 17, 2011 3:43 PM CST up reply actions  

same, free agency is not the way to build a team in the NFL

the Redskins have shown us that much

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 17, 2011 6:01 PM CST up reply actions  

Well with that logic

Then we should have never signed Charles Woodson.

by SoCal19 on Dec 17, 2011 9:11 PM CST up reply actions  

Completely different situation.

In that time we played the Bates/Sanders 43, which was exclusively press man coverage and had been trying to get bye w/ Ahmad Carroll opposite Harris. We DESPERATELY needed another CB who could excel in press coverage and Woodson was definitely that guy. It was out of character for Thompson to spend big in FA that year, but it was also a necessity! Thompson identified a premium need and was able to match a premium player to that need. We were desperate for another top CB at that time, and Thompson got his man!

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 17, 2011 10:51 PM CST up reply actions  

It's not different

We have been trying to get by with Eric Walden/Mike Neal/Jarius Wynn opposite Clay Matthews. We desperatley need a pass rush from the right side, to take some attention away from Clay, so we can stop being 31st against the pass in the NFL. Eventually, we’re going to stop scoring 40 pts a game. Other teams are going to figure us out and we’re going to need to be able to stop people.

Let me ask you this. Hypothetical. If we could afford to do it, would you rather have Finley at TE or Mario Williams at ROLB? We run the exact same team out there next year and one of those two is the only difference. I take Williams in a heart beat.

by SoCal19 on Dec 18, 2011 1:07 AM CST up reply actions  

Of course I'd rather have Mario Williams over Jermichael Finley

but that’s not really what you are proposing. It’s like we were debating which metal is better, silver or gold, and then asking, hypothetically, which you would rather have, $1000 worth of silver or $100 worth of gold. SEE SILVER IS BETTER, YOU EVEN SAID SO YOURSELF!!!

Mario Williams is making $13.8 mil this year, Finley is making $1.4 mil this year. To make it a fair comparison, let’s balance the salaries. Who would you rather have?:
Mario Williams $13.8 mil
or
Aaron Rodgers $7.25 mil + James Starks $405k + Jordy Nelson 637k + Jermichael Finley $1.4 mil + TJ Lang $480k + BJ Raji $955k + Clay Matthews $660k + Desmond Bishop $1.188 mil + Sam Shields $405k

The second option leaves you with an extra $500k or so in your pocket.

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 18, 2011 2:21 AM CST up reply actions  

Hey!

You’re not allowed to make a good argument on a sports blog! It’s supposed to be name-calling and “sky is falling” only!

In Every Climb and Place....

by PhoenicianPakFan on Dec 18, 2011 11:11 AM CST up reply actions  

Fuk you, PhoenicianPakFan!

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 18, 2011 11:40 AM CST up reply actions  

it's very different

teams like the Redskins try to BUILD their team through free agency, which doesn’t work.

The Packers build their team through the draft, and occasionally sign a free agent to help put them over the top, if the player is the right fit and right price.

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 18, 2011 2:31 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

If there is a good pass rushing option that hits FA then I wouldn’t mind us going after him but that’s a big IF. Good pass rushers generally don’t hit FA because there aren’t a whole lot of them — and especially 3-4 OLB guys. It’s kind of the same thing with good OT’s. There just aren’t many that become FA’s because they’re so valuable and there aren’t many of them. And then one does make it to FA, you’ve got 6 teams bidding up his contract so high that he’s basically gotta be the best at his position to get good value for the contract.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Dec 18, 2011 11:35 AM CST up reply actions  

We shouldn't have. TT sucks at life.

That bust is old and slow, and then in the biggest game of his career he quits on his teammates because his shoulder is sore and leaves the game.

In Every Climb and Place....

by PhoenicianPakFan on Dec 17, 2011 11:14 PM CST up reply actions  

Learning Curve?

Clay Matthews never played in 3-4 defense and came in as a ROOKIE and tore it up. BJ Raji, never played in a 3-4 defense, he adjusted just fine. Cullen Jenkins was with the Packers when they were a 4-3 and transitioned well to the 3-4. Seriously, system transitions is not a legit argument. The guy is rushing the passer, that’s it, plain and simple. The difference between a 3-4 and a 4-3 is personnel. Dom Capers has said so himself.

by SoCal19 on Dec 18, 2011 1:25 AM CST up reply actions  

Your right, Matthews did...

But he didn’t have to unlearn a D that he was in for 4 or more Pro seasons an learn how to play standing up in space. Matthews did those things at USC and had a clean slate to team him from, not one that is decidedly from a 43 scheme. Let me ask you this? How many times have you seen a player go from a 34 to a 43, or vice versa and have an immediate and profound impact?

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 18, 2011 10:31 AM CST up reply actions  

CM3 played "elephant end" a few times as well though.

It’s not like he was just a 4-3 OLB who never rushed passer or a 4-3 DE who never dropped into coverage. He did both of those things, and so it was a much easier transition for him. On the other hand, to take a 4-3 end and move him to 3-4 OLB is tough. We saw what happened with Kampman (who was an awfully good 4-3 DE) when they tried. Not only did he struggle with coverage, but he also struggled to get pressure on the QB unless his hand was in the dirt. It can happen, but its a lot more difficult to take a pro DE and make them change than it would be to take a college LB or DE and make the same switch.

"I'm here to talk about the economy today -- about the need to get four quarters of strong, consistent performance. That wasn't another Jay Cutler joke, I swear. It could be, but it's not."

by Kuhl on Dec 18, 2011 2:03 PM CST up reply actions  

and Houston isn’t going to let him walk!

Sure they will, that’s why the drafted Brooks Reed last year.

by SoCal19 on Dec 18, 2011 1:29 AM CST up reply actions  

That’d be my guess.

But even if they do let him walk that’s saying something too. It either says he doesn’t fit the 3-4 or he doesn’t want to play in the 3-4.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Dec 18, 2011 11:37 AM CST up reply actions  

it's Kroy, not Kory

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 21, 2011 3:54 PM CST up reply actions  

That’s a good way to look at it.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 21, 2011 12:09 PM CST up reply actions  

Quarless and Williams?

Both are good role players, neither is ever going to force a D Coordinator to double team him. Quarless has good straight speed, but lacks Finley’s overall athleticism to command a double. And Williams lack of size makes him a a TE that can be covered by a LB. Williams is basically the same size and speed of the LB covering him. Both are good roles players, but neither presents Finleys complete matchup nitemare for the opposition.

Just curious how you felt about LeRoy Butler? He had the same attitude and outgoing personality that Finley has… Bet you loved LeRoy didn’t you?! But now you don’t like Finleys? Yeah, he’s dropped a few more balls this year than he should, but he has always had terrific hands and this is a blip on the radar that will go away and be forgotten! LeRoy had the same peronality as Finley! I’ve met both of them and spoken to both and they are both outgoing guys who say whats on their minds, but there is nothing phoney about either of them!

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 15, 2011 3:59 AM CST up reply actions  

Quarless actually probably has better straight line speed than Finley

but nobody on the team at the position is even close to Finley’s overall talent level

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 15, 2011 7:28 AM CST up reply actions  

By my calculations...

they currently have about 30 mil in cap space for 2012. This is pretty much a guess considering the site I used didn’t do a very good job of explaining how bonuses are figured in so this number is pretty much just using base salaries. So just to be safe lets figure 20 mil free for next year. Our FA list is:

Bush, I wouldn’t pay the 1.4 mil he’s making this year but he would be worth about 1 mil or so next year
Flynn, someone is sure to pick him up for a starting job
Grant, is done in GB
Howard Green, who?, j/k I would bring him back for 1 mil or so just for depth
Lee, he could go and I wouldn’t notice
Walden, like Green he plays a position that lacks quality depth so I would bring him back for around 1 mil
Wells, this is the one that’s gonna cost us. There’s no clear successor so i think they have no choice but to bring him back for at least 5 mil a year.

Plus if you estimate about 5 mil for the draft that leaves about 7 mil or so left over if nobody gets cut. I think the money could be there for re-signing Finley but it will hamstring them for doing deals during the season for players who will be FA in 2013. That’s a list that includes Clifton, Crabtree, EDS, Driver, Franscois, Goode, Jennings, Brad Jones, Lang, Masthay, Peprah, Shields, Wynn, and Zombo. There’s alot more people in that list that I would want to keep than the previous list and I’d rather have the money to do it next season that wait for other teams to drive the price up.

Btw, does anyone knows a better site for showing contracts than rotowire?

Packers' Magic Numbers:
Clinch Division = DONE!!!
Clinch 1st Rd Bye = DONE!!!
Clinch Homefield = 1

by Bezerkers on Dec 15, 2011 8:59 AM CST up reply actions  

Bush will be paid.
Grant if he’s not asking starter’s money may come back. (IMO I’d love to see him come back to continue splitting time)
Could see Walden leaving. GB already has 2 OLBs with about the same skill level and they’ll hopefully draft one this year.

Regarding the 2013 FAs, Clifton & Driver will retire or sign veteran’s minimum deals (only way GB resigns them).
I’m perfectly fine with Jones & Zombo leaving, neither one really impresses me and hopefully they have a starter in place by then.
Peprah’s a solid player but he may be looking for a starting position (which GB won’t give him long term unless Collins is done. That adds another aspect to this, Collins may be retiring and not counting against the cap)
Crabtree, EDS, Francois, Goode, Wynn: Ho-hum, none of them are worth much, and if they ask for anything more than backup money they will be gone.
Masthay’s a punter and so won’t be paid much.

So Lang, Shields, & Jennings are the only 3 to worry about. (and Shields & Lang probably won’t be looking for a big pay day since Shields will likely still be the nickel back and Lang won’t be demanding top Guard money any time soon.)

"I'm here to talk about the economy today -- about the need to get four quarters of strong, consistent performance. That wasn't another Jay Cutler joke, I swear. It could be, but it's not."

by Kuhl on Dec 15, 2011 1:26 PM CST up reply actions  

Francois

I’m intrigued by Francois and I bring him back. I was impressed by his two interceptions, both athletic plays. Could he become a third down passing linebacker? He seems a little leaner and more fluid perhaps than Hawk or Bishop. That end zone pick last week was a great read matched with an athletic play. I’m intrigued.

Nitschke never wore an earring!

by Packer Pete on Dec 17, 2011 6:42 AM CST up reply actions  

Plus

Aaron Rodgers is due for an extension and a hefty raise.

by SoCal19 on Dec 15, 2011 2:24 PM CST up reply actions  

Rodgers due for an extension?

You do realize he’s signed through 2015, right?

13.

by Wiedmann on Dec 15, 2011 4:15 PM CST up reply actions  

2014 I thought?

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 15, 2011 8:59 PM CST up reply actions  

2014 season

which ends in Feb 2015.

13.

by Wiedmann on Dec 16, 2011 12:00 AM CST up reply actions  

that wouldn't be 'through' 2015 then

given that there’s still the 2015 season to play after that… but whatever, doesn’t matter, I don’t think there’s any chance he plays a game for any other team until he’s at least 39/40 and we’ve gotten tired of the retirement dance again

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 16, 2011 12:02 AM CST up reply actions   2 recs

He's not going anywhere

and has a contract to play the 2014 season. My original point was he’s not “due an extension.”

13.

by Wiedmann on Dec 16, 2011 12:56 AM CST up reply actions  

Yeah that's two more seasons

The guy is the best player in football. You lock him up for the next 8 years and pay him what he’s worth. The guy is only making $8 Million this year. How insulting would that be to Rodgers to not give him a longer deal with way more money?

by SoCal19 on Dec 18, 2011 1:10 AM CST up reply actions  

Not insulting at all

When he signed the deal, he wasn’t insulted. I doubt he would be now. Maybe he understands something you clearly don’t: the salary cap.

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 18, 2011 2:24 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

three more seasons

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 18, 2011 2:33 AM CST up reply actions  

by that logic, the Saints should have restructured Drew Brees' contract a couple years ago

to pay him market value. But they didn’t, and Drew Brees has continued to play at an extremely high level and is going to re-sign with them in the offseason. He doesn’t seem to be insulted by the situation. I doubt the situation with Rodgers will be any different, he’ll get a long term contract worth a lot more money when the time comes

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 18, 2011 2:35 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Brady & Manning have taken below market contracts as well.

They understood that the cap situation makes it very difficult to sign an elite (not just in the John Clayton sense of the word) QB and still be able to retain and bring in talent.

"I'm here to talk about the economy today -- about the need to get four quarters of strong, consistent performance. That wasn't another Jay Cutler joke, I swear. It could be, but it's not."

by Kuhl on Dec 18, 2011 2:05 PM CST up reply actions  

He’ll get his deal…he has to wait his turn.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 19, 2011 10:36 AM CST up reply actions  

That's a big list

but not a whole of players that really need to be re-signed. For this upcoming offseason, Wells is about the only one who I would actively consider trying to sign, and it wouldn’t be the end of the world if he went elsewhere.

For the following offseason:
First of all you can get rid of the RFAs (will be getting a small raise, not much cap impact):
Crabtree, Francois, Masthay, Shields, Zombo

and the guys who will retire:
Clifton, Driver

That leaves us with:
EDS, Goode, Jennings, Brad Jones, Lang, Peprah, Wynn

Really, the only guy who needs to be resigned is Jennings. The other guys are solid role players, but can easily be replaced in one of the next two drafts before they leave. If your argument against signing Finley is that we’ll lose Evan Deitrich-Smith, Brad Jones & Jarius Wynn, let’s just say, I think I’d prefer Finley to those three.

13.

by Wiedmann on Dec 15, 2011 4:13 PM CST up reply actions  

We must keep EDS.

He has raised shoe untying to an art form!

by Ben T on Dec 15, 2011 4:23 PM CST up reply actions   4 recs

And if we use him for nothing else...

start him against only the Lions in order to get in Suh’s brain.

In Every Climb and Place....

by PhoenicianPakFan on Dec 15, 2011 9:08 PM CST up reply actions  

are you implying that Suh actually has one of those?

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 19, 2011 3:52 PM CST up reply actions   2 recs

Well next year may also be the time to re-sign Rodgers too.

We are getting an absolute steal only paying him 9 mil next year, 10.25 in 2012, and 11.5 in 2013 when he is easily playing at more than double that in value.

The players who are FA after next season who I want to re-sign really depend on they production next year. Jennings for sure needs to be re-signed, but I could also see Francois, Peprah, or Brad Jones having that break out year ala Tramon Williams last year. Driver could still be brought back at lower than the 5 mil he’s making now if he’s still productive and Clifton I’m not too sure even makes it to next season. Lang should probably be re-signed and depending on the development of Newhouse and Sherrod maybe EDS needs to be kept to.

I think a case could be made for keeping any or all of the FA’s of 2012 and a case could be made for keeping none of them. The main point I was trying to make is that it seems lately like TT likes to have flexability to sign guys mid-season and I think signing Finely would not allow this as things currently stand. In the end I have confidence that TT will make the best decision regardless.

Packers' Magic Numbers:
Clinch Division = DONE!!!
Clinch 1st Rd Bye = DONE!!!
Clinch Homefield = 1

by Bezerkers on Dec 15, 2011 7:47 PM CST up reply actions  

Its about re-allocating the salaries when they come off.

Clifton goes directly to Rodgers.
Driver goes directly to Finley.
Pickett goes directly to Raji.
Woodson goes directly to Matthews.
Grant goes to Wells.

Clifton, Driver and Grant are good as gone after this year, IMO. Pickett a year after and Woodson another year after that. I don’t see how Newhouse or Sherrod have any bearing on EDS. They are OT and EDS if he ever has a position is a Center. Francois will likely be a backup and role player, same w/ Peprah. Jones will be lucky to be on the team next year. Lang is the only one who might get a decent (3-4M salary) contract any time soon.

Over-simplified? Certainly, but it doesn’t have to be too much more complicated either! Enough money getting freed up to keep pretty much everyone.

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 15, 2011 8:35 PM CST up reply actions  

I think Woodson stick around until the end of his contract in 2014.

Although his base pay does get cut by 5 mil after next season. I think he makes the move to safety at some point in the near future and plays out the rest of his contract.

EDS has been playing OG in place of Sitton the last two weeks so I’m not sure where you get that his only position is center. I figure they will keep him around for inside depth because he can play G/C. As for Sherrod and Newhouse, one could turn into a bust, making the need to keep EDS for depth.

I don’t think its as easy as you make it sound with just swapping salaries. For one, Clifton is a FA a full two years before Rodgers, Woodson is a FA after Matthews and there are a number of players that are due significant raises in the next couple years which eats up a significant chunk of what is gained by people leaving.

Packers' Magic Numbers:
Clinch Division = DONE!!!
Clinch 1st Rd Bye = DONE!!!
Clinch Homefield = 1

by Bezerkers on Dec 16, 2011 12:19 AM CST up reply actions  

Its not EDS only position.

But it is the position he’ll play if he sticks around for long. He’s not a natural OG, but is a natural Center. He has played much better this season than I ever thought he had the ability to play. My point was, that EDS position in GB, if he sticks around is going to be at Center as a replacement for Wells. He might actually be giving the Packers some leverage in contract negotiations w/ Wells. If they think EDS can be a serviceable Center for a couple years, they might let Wells walk. I doubt that happens, but Wells might now be able to get alot more as a FA than what the Packer are willing to give him.

Rodgers needs to get locked up soon. You don’t wait to re-sign a Franchise QB till he becomes a FA, you get him locked up generally 2 years before he becomes a FA. So Rodgers will get paid SOON, like w/in a year IMO.

Like I said, its an oversimplification, but not that much so. Woodson’s contract goes down later, so you sign Matthews to a contract that escalates as Woodson’s goes down.

The guys I mentioned are the ones that will be due for significant raises. WHat others are there, besides Finley, Wells, Raji, Matthews and Rodgers? Maybe Lang, but the rest are all role players.

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 16, 2011 8:06 PM CST up reply actions  

Driver

aint retiring, said so himself.

by glblank on Dec 15, 2011 8:38 PM CST up reply actions  

THen the Packers will kindly ask him too.

His role is only going to get smaller and they will want to keep Gurley next year to see his continued progress. Driver can say that, but the other alternative is getting released and playing elsewhere, which he’s also said he won’t do. He isn’t going to be needed for production or leadership next year. I don’t see a place for him on the Packers next year.

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 15, 2011 8:44 PM CST up reply actions  

I can't say too much more that wasn't already said before

But it was mentioned that we could slap the Franchise Tag on Finley and trade him. Then we can build on our defense. It sounds good on paper. It really does. Our team will look similar to how it did last year. The only thing is our running game would be better, but our D would still have question marks. We don’t know if the rookies would pan out. Anyhow, our 2010 Offense was not unstoppable like it is this year. Several teams managed to slow down our offense, but thankfully, our team got hot at the right time. Do you really think we are going to have a run like that every season? Definitely not.

We all understand that Finley’s stats are down this year. For starters, Finley is still drawing a lot of attention from the defense. Teams are forced to keep him in check. That is one thing that is helping our WR’s. Our entire offense is different without Finley. Jennings will now go back to being double teamed, etc. So even though Finley is dropping some passes, he is making sure our WR’s are getting open. That alone is the biggest reason why we are undefeated despite our defensive failures.

Does Finley have a big head? IDK, maybe…Apparently it hasn’t been big enough to disrupt our locker room though, and it hasn’t been bad enough to give us even a single loss this year. Maybe if he was unmanagable or uncontrollable, I’d say trade him. However, that’s not the case. Like you said, don’t fix something what doesn’t need to be fixed. Our offense is perfect the way it is. If you take away one of the most vital weapons on our offense, the entire complexity of our offense is different. We should resign him at a fair salary that reflects upon his career in Green Bay. I don’t think Finley will be the highest paid TE in the league.

One game at a time...

by Jabooty on Dec 15, 2011 6:38 AM CST reply actions   1 recs

I certainly don’t want to discount what Finley brings to the team. He’s a matchup problem for other teams and the talent is clearly there. I am disappointed in him this year, I thought this was going to be the year he staked his claim as a top 3-4 guy in the league. He did manage to stay healthy though which is HUGE.

Clearly, Thompson at least must have been considering life without Finley with all the TEs drafted recently. I have hope that one or two of them will become solid contributors and maybe more but to lose Finley right now would be tough I think. Next year, I am sure Driver will be gone so that leaves an opening in the WR group. We don’t want to lose too many pieces in the same year. I think Finley is franchised this year and probably kept. Its another chance for him to prove his worth.

I don’t have an issue with Finley’s attitude. He’s got a WR mentality…that shouldn’t be shocking because that is basically what he is. He wants the ball, nothing too crazy there…I think the media (and all of us) probably made a bigger deal out of the request for more passes thrown his way than Finley did. As I recall, he went to the coach with the request, not the media. The fact that the story got out there likely wasn’t his doing…unless he has Bus Cook as his agent, then maybe it was him!

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 15, 2011 3:11 PM CST reply actions  

all the TEs drafted recently
Clearly, Thompson at least must have been considering life without Finley with all the TEs drafted recently.

is due, at least in part, to the changing roles of the TE and FB positions in the NFL, and is tied in directly to the fact that we have only one FB.

Most, if not all, of the TEs on the roster are capable of playing fullback.

"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

"We're nobody's underdog!"

"We don't play scared!"

by NorthStarr on Dec 17, 2011 3:13 PM CST up reply actions  

Plus McCarthy loves TEs on special teams

"I'm here to talk about the economy today -- about the need to get four quarters of strong, consistent performance. That wasn't another Jay Cutler joke, I swear. It could be, but it's not."

by Kuhl on Dec 17, 2011 6:43 PM CST up reply actions  

and OLBs

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 17, 2011 6:45 PM CST up reply actions  

I think it was also partially insurance in case we move on from Finley.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 19, 2011 10:37 AM CST up reply actions  

Nonsense

Not the points made but the conclusion. Finley’s presence draws coverage that opens other targets. Finley may want to be paid top dollar but he sure aint gettin it from the Pack. Franchise him and make it clear he has to stand head and shoulders above, Gronk n Graham to even get near his demands. Remind him there are four other hungry studs behind him and if his whining escalates or his production flags, he can market himself to other teams on the sidelines. Put up or shut up.

by glblank on Dec 15, 2011 8:34 PM CST reply actions  

Who are these Studs behind Finley?

Quarless lacks overall athleticism and is at this point a good blocker at most. WIlliams is severely limited by his size. He won’t ever be a playmaker that commands a double team. Good role player, not much more. Crabtree is a ST player and blocking TE/FB at his best. Taylor same as Crabtree… Where are these studs your talking about behind Finley?

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 15, 2011 8:40 PM CST up reply actions   2 recs

you honestly need to hop off Finley's dick there dude

the guy is not flawless, is undoubtedly ultimately replaceable, and you have no idea how much potential the guys behind him have, because they haven’t played much.

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 15, 2011 9:01 PM CST up reply actions   2 recs

What the hell did I even say about Finley?

I was freakin talkin about Quarless and Williams! But don’t let that stop you form trying to bait ANOTHER argument! You seem to be the one getting yourself off by baiting me.. Unwrap your hand from your dick and wash up!

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 15, 2011 9:40 PM CST up reply actions  

If he's a master at baiting you....

does that mean…..

In Every Climb and Place....

by PhoenicianPakFan on Dec 15, 2011 10:48 PM CST up reply actions  

well, you may be a cunning linguist

but I’m a master debater.

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 16, 2011 12:00 AM CST up reply actions  

all you ever do is gush over Finley

as if he is the greatest tight end to ever play the game and can do no wrong. It has gotten annoying, especially when he has not produced at all like the superstar you continue to assure everyone he is.

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 16, 2011 12:00 AM CST up reply actions  

The reason he hasn't produced enough is that GB has too many weapons

Sure, he’s had drops (but so has Jennings), but he makes the GB offense what it is. All the different formations used are predicated on Finley’s role in them. Finley is the mismatch that all DCs identify & base their coverage around. When he goes in motion, it identifies the defense to Rodgers. Finley rarely gets single coverage, which opens up the field for other players. You know all those plays this year where WRs were wide open? Finley was drawing the safety over the top & the coverage rotated, opening it up for Driver/Jennings/whoever. He may not be the engine that drives the O, but he’s the turbo booster that puts it over the top.

13.

by Wiedmann on Dec 16, 2011 12:52 AM CST up reply actions   3 recs

I can't believe it...

I’m recd you!!

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 16, 2011 8:12 PM CST up reply actions  

I will too, just to green it.

Maybe green will help you become friends again….

/starts strumming guitar and singing Kumbaya

In Every Climb and Place....

by PhoenicianPakFan on Dec 16, 2011 9:37 PM CST up reply actions  

You know, we do generally agree

I just don’t care for the way you usually go about stating it.

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 16, 2011 9:55 PM CST up reply actions  

The reason he hasn’t produced is because he doesn’t make the plays when they call on him as well.

Guess what guys, Gronkowski gets that coverage too…so does Gates and Graham…and ya know what, they all still are having great seasons. They aren’t dropping the clutch catches. They are producing despite having chumbalome LBs on them. All those teams have lots of targets to throw to as well.

How many excuses does he get…he’s just not performing like he should be…its okay to admit it.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 19, 2011 10:42 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

this is exactly right

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 19, 2011 3:53 PM CST up reply actions  

The difference here is

that those guys’ QBs don’t have so many other weapons to turn to when they get that coverage.

"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

"We're nobody's underdog!"

"We don't play scared!"

by NorthStarr on Dec 21, 2011 1:13 AM CST up reply actions  

Huh? I think you are looking through green colored glasses with that one.

Jennings = Welker = Colston = Jackson
Nelson = Hernandez = Moore = Floyd
Jones = ?? = Sproles = Mathews

Lets not get too high on our team These other teams have plenty of good targets along with very good QBs.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 21, 2011 12:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Yeah…Just thought it would be overkill, point was made! :-) I think the saints are actually the only team that has a deeper set of receivers in the league. Its sick how much talent they have given Brees. I can’t believe none of those guys has moved on yet for a chance at more catches and stuff.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 24, 2011 8:09 AM CST up reply actions  

seriously? Brady doesn't have many other weapons? Brees doesn't have many other weapons?

you know nothing about either of those teams if you actually believe that.

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 21, 2011 3:56 PM CST up reply actions  

How is he "gushing over Finley?"

He is stating facts. Finley is head and shoulders above our other TE’s. He is not easily replaceable. No one on here is saying he is a superstar. You are obviously just trying to start something with him.

SUPER BOWL CHAMPS

by Chief Oshkosh on Dec 16, 2011 11:25 AM CST up reply actions  

You are right, he’s not easily replaceable, but honestly his level of play is down this year which makes it a little easier.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 19, 2011 10:42 AM CST up reply actions  

Not buying this argument, either,

since every player that ever plays has a year when their level of play is ‘down’.
It’s inevitable, like death and taxes.

Hell, Rodgers is going to have such a year, eventually (and, more likely, sooner than later, at the rate he’s been playing.
Is that gonna mean it’s time to look at replacing him?

"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

"We're nobody's underdog!"

"We don't play scared!"

by NorthStarr on Dec 21, 2011 1:20 AM CST up reply actions  

But look what you are comparing it too…what is Finley’s best year, 650 yards? You are acting like he’s been a 1200 yard receiver before.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 21, 2011 12:13 PM CST up reply actions  

That wasn't actually a comparison;

Rodgers was just an extreme example, to illustrate my point that

every player that ever plays has a year when their level of play is ‘down’.
so, saying that
his level of play is down this year
just doesn’t mean that much.

"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

"We're nobody's underdog!"

"We don't play scared!"

by NorthStarr on Dec 21, 2011 8:52 PM CST up reply actions  

But it DOES mean a lot when his best season isn’t even that impressive. finley having a down year when his best year was just average is not saying much for him.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 24, 2011 8:10 AM CST up reply actions  

Whats gotten annoying?

Your deliberately baiting arguments! When you decide to have a decent conversation, this entire blog will be happier for it!

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 16, 2011 8:11 PM CST up reply actions  

Stroh's right, you're going too far.

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 16, 2011 10:34 PM CST up reply actions  

The Mayans were right...
Stroh’s right

and it’s not even 2012 yet.

In Every Climb and Place....

by PhoenicianPakFan on Dec 16, 2011 11:37 PM CST up reply actions  

That's just the end of a cycle.

Don’t get too worked up about it.

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 17, 2011 2:36 AM CST up reply actions  

Stroh's right.
But don’t let that stop you form trying to bait ANOTHER argument

glblank said that there are “four other hungry studs” behind Finley," and Stroh responded with a good, valid argument about why each of those guys isn’t a stud.

He made no points about Finley, used no insults and made no personal attacks; yet, your reply to him was nothing but an attack.

Clearly a vehicle to bait an argument.

And, you know what else I’ve noticed?
You don’t attack anybody else who repeatedly defends Finley.

"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

"We're nobody's underdog!"

"We don't play scared!"

by NorthStarr on Dec 17, 2011 3:34 PM CST up reply actions  

four other hungry studs

The more this gets removed from it’s original context, the funnier (and strangely erotic) it sounds…

In Every Climb and Place....

by PhoenicianPakFan on Dec 17, 2011 3:47 PM CST up reply actions  

You are such a perv.

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 17, 2011 3:55 PM CST up reply actions  

LOL

Was thinking of a reply along those lines. But figured I’d let it sit for awhile to see what responses he got.

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 17, 2011 4:12 PM CST up reply actions  

FTFY

You don’t attack anybody else who repeatedly defends Finley.

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 17, 2011 3:49 PM CST up reply actions  

Treated

Packers: Working on a dynasty.
Blackhawks: Taking care of business as usual.
Badgers:Back-to-back B1G Champions!
Brewers: Move along, nothin' to see here.

by Tepo6688 on Dec 17, 2011 8:21 PM CST up reply actions  

well I'm sorry, I wasn't intending to start a fight

I apologize for putting myself in the position to be misinterpreted and taken out of the discussion. I know, with that, a lot of people are going to misunderstand and create their own storylines or whatever, but I know what I meant, and the man upstairs knows what I meant…

seriously though, my bad

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 17, 2011 10:15 PM CST up reply actions  

Don't think anyone is buying this...

I apologize for putting myself in the position to be misinterpreted

Not to be a jerk, but its far from the 1st time its happened, and its not NorthStarr you should be apologizing to!

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 17, 2011 10:55 PM CST up reply actions  

He was making a Suh joke

but yeah, don’t be a dick, Sheehan

Packers: Working on a dynasty.
Blackhawks: Taking care of business as usual.
Badgers:Back-to-back B1G Champions!
Brewers: Move along, nothin' to see here.

by Tepo6688 on Dec 17, 2011 11:19 PM CST up reply actions  

We won a Super Bowl

With Quarless and Crabtree as our TE’s. Finley is a luxuory we’ve proven able to live with out. Williams has barely seen the field, how can you even asses his talent level. The guy was the 2010 Mackey award winner in college which is saying something. Here is the last 10 Mackey award winners. Pretty solid list of TE’s in my book.

2001

Daniel Graham

Colorado

2002

Dallas Clark

Iowa

2003

Kellen Winslow II

Miami (FL)

2004

Heath Miller

Virginia

2005

Marcedes Lewis

UCLA

2006

Matt Spaeth

Minnesota

2007

Fred Davis

Southern California

2008

Chase Coffman

Missouri

2009

Aaron Hernandez

Florida

2010

D. J. Williams

Arkansas

by SoCal19 on Dec 18, 2011 1:17 AM CST up reply actions  

And none of them are as good as J-Mike...

"I'm here to talk about the economy today -- about the need to get four quarters of strong, consistent performance. That wasn't another Jay Cutler joke, I swear. It could be, but it's not."

by Kuhl on Dec 18, 2011 1:29 AM CST up reply actions  

Not saying they are

But you can’t say Williams doesn’t have any talent. Lets think about what the level of production between say Qualress and Finley and how it correlates to wins and losses. How many more games a year do you think we win or lose with Finley over Quarless? Is there really that much of a difference that it affects the outcome of games? I don’t think so. While Finley is a better recieving threat than Quarless, I think Quarless is a much better run blocker. Basically, the argument of this thread comes down to how much Finley is going to cost, which none of us know. If it’s for $8-$10 Million, no thanks, but if its at $3-$4 Million with incentives, sign him.

by SoCal19 on Dec 18, 2011 1:35 AM CST up reply actions  

Correct me if I'm wrong here...

…but didn’t we lose some games last year without Finley? Remind me again how many games we’ve lost with him this year?

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 18, 2011 2:25 AM CST up reply actions  

Also, Finley's not getting $8-10 mil/yr

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 18, 2011 2:26 AM CST up reply actions  

well they lost two games with him in the lineup last year as well...

so it’s not like they were unbeatable with him playing last year, the offense has improved in other areas besides him returning – namely, Rodgers has been a completely different, better QB ever since his second concussion, which IMO is much more responsible for them being undefeated than Finley returning to the lineup

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 18, 2011 2:40 AM CST up reply actions  

They lost one game with him in the line-up, unless you count the game where he was injured before making a catch.

In that one game they lost, the Packers committed 18 penalties, turned the ball over twice & still only lost by a FG.

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 18, 2011 2:53 AM CST up reply actions  

Well, let's see...

Do you think there is any chance that at least part of Rodgers improvement this year can be attributed to the attention that Finley demands. That, along with the improvement of Jordy opposite an already amazing Jennings, would seem to be a QBs best friend.

by Ben T on Dec 18, 2011 8:10 AM CST up reply actions  

yes, I agree that Finley is responsible for some of the improvement

however, I think the difference in Rodgers’ play has been much more vital to their success. Especially since Rodgers seemed to take it to another level last year without Finley when they went on their Super Bowl run

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 18, 2011 4:06 PM CST up reply actions  

True, but you can say the same thing about Grant

Not saying Grant is better, or more important, than Finley. But this is weak. We won 3 road playoff games and then a Super Bowl without Finley. I hope he’s still on the team next year and I trust TT to do what’s best.

But can we please stop with the “we haven’t lost a game this year with Finley”? We also haven’t lost a game with Kuhn, Nelson, Driver, Jones, Cobb, Crabtree and Rodgers. And that’s just the offense.

December, 7 1941 may be a day that lives in infamy, but December 6, 2011 is a day that will live in AWESOMENESS!!! The day I became part owner of the Green Bay Packers!

In Cheese We Trust

by Zundar on Dec 18, 2011 10:21 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Its about mismatches...

Finley creates all kinds of mismatches and commands the DC’s and his Defenses attention every play he is on the field. Take Finley away and Jennings and Nelson are getting doubled every down! How would the offense look then? Rodgers is clearly the engine of the offense, but Finley is (to borrow Wiedmanns analogy) the turbo that makes it REALLY go! Don’t have numbers to support this, but Finley gets doubled more than even Jennings does IMO.

How much is Finley gonna cost? Look at the franchise tag numbers… 5-6M per

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Dec 18, 2011 10:42 AM CST up reply actions  

+1

It’s all about the mismatches!

I don’t wanna downplay the year Nelson has had and I think he’s one of the best #2 receiving options in the league right now but he’s gotten a lot of matchups due to Finley lining up out wide.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Dec 18, 2011 11:43 AM CST up reply actions  

I thought it was

all about the Benjamins. I like that better : P

by Ben T on Dec 19, 2011 9:55 AM CST up reply actions  

Dallas Clark was a couple years ago

he’s kinda over the hill now though

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 18, 2011 2:37 AM CST up reply actions  

Oddly, off the top of my head, two TEs that are playing better than JMike...

are not on that list. Graham (the New Orleans variety) and Gronk

In Every Climb and Place....

by PhoenicianPakFan on Dec 18, 2011 11:16 AM CST up reply actions  

I would also put

Jason Witten, Tony Gonzalez, Fred Davis(when he was healthy), Aaron Hernandez, Brandon Pettigrew and Antonio Gates all ahead of Finley right now.

by SoCal19 on Dec 18, 2011 11:57 AM CST up reply actions  

Well, then, I have no reason to respect your opinion.

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 18, 2011 12:14 PM CST up reply actions   3 recs

Which would be why your comments have no credibility

All of those TE’s are statistically better than Finley this year.

by SoCal19 on Dec 18, 2011 12:31 PM CST up reply actions  

Fred Davis? Brandon Pettigrew?

Stats aren’t the end-all be-all.

13.

Build Lasers And Stuff For More Ownage, Dude!

by Wiedmann on Dec 18, 2011 3:20 PM CST up reply actions  

And, this,
Which would be why your comments have no credibility

all by itself, removes any and all credibility from yours.

"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

"We're nobody's underdog!"

"We don't play scared!"

by NorthStarr on Dec 21, 2011 1:28 AM CST up reply actions  

I agree about Gates, Gonzalez, and perhaps Witten

but past that you kinda got silly

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 18, 2011 4:08 PM CST up reply actions  

Why? What has Finley done to put himself higher than those guys?

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 19, 2011 10:50 AM CST up reply actions  

those guys don't have the same athletic ability, and therefore don't command the same type of attention Finley does

by those guys, I mean Fred Davis, Aaron Hernandez (who is more receiver than TE to me, given that he has decent enough speed, and is only 6-1), and Pettigrew.

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 19, 2011 3:55 PM CST up reply actions  

That is true. I agree.

BUT at some point he needs to put it all together on the field if he legitimately wants to be in the discussion with the other top 5 guys.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 21, 2011 12:14 PM CST up reply actions  

I agree, and I think he will

we saw it down the stretch in 2009 when he came back from his injury, I’m confident we’ll see it again

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 21, 2011 3:59 PM CST up reply actions  

meh…based on what? What we THINK he can do?

Based on production on the field, Dallas Clark has had a far more impressive career (maybe you forget about him because of this year). Fred Davis has emerged as a TE with a lot of potential (and that is with terrible QBs throwing to him), Hernandez is the same despite being overshadowed by Gronk.

Look I love Finley, but there are too many people swinging from his sack and its getting old…its time for Finley to PERFORM.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 19, 2011 10:49 AM CST up reply actions  

I agree with the last part

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Dec 19, 2011 3:56 PM CST up reply actions  

Where is this stud you call Finley anyway, I haven’t really seen much of him this year.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 19, 2011 10:38 AM CST up reply actions  

I can't find anyplace in here

where he did call Finley a stud.

Who are these Studs behind Finley?
Quarless lacks overall athleticism and is at this point a good blocker at most. WIlliams is severely limited by his size. He won’t ever be a playmaker that commands a double team. Good role player, not much more. Crabtree is a ST player and blocking TE/FB at his best. Taylor same as Crabtree… Where are these studs your talking about behind Finley?

"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

"We're nobody's underdog!"

"We don't play scared!"

by NorthStarr on Dec 21, 2011 1:35 AM CST up reply actions  

I can’t imagine that Finley won’t be back next year. For some reason, of the all the Packers, he attracts the most bizarre attention. There is no indication that his contract demands are going to be unreasonable. And he has yet to prove himself to be as great as a lot of fans want to claim.

He is a talented player. He is a better TE with more impact than his stats would indicate, which is similar to all Packer receivers. We’ll see what happens in the next 3 weeks when he becomes more of a primary receiver.

by MikeDB on Dec 15, 2011 10:35 PM CST reply actions  

We’ll see what happens in the next 3 weeks when he becomes more of a primary receiver.

This is something I personally can’t wait to see. With Jennings out, there probably will be more emphasis on doing things to free Finley up. I think this is going to be a big opportunity for him to produce and I think he will.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Dec 16, 2011 1:07 PM CST up reply actions  

This is another area where I agree with Strohman.

This is going to be a big opportunity for Cobb to step up.

With Jennings out, Finley isn’t going to draw any less attention from the DCs, and Nelson is probably going to get the extra attention that Jennings got.

Instead of “doing things to free Finley up,” it is probably time to do what so many, in the preseason, were arguing should have been done all season — draw up some things to take advantage of Cobbs unique abilities the things that Cobb has shown the coaches (whatever they mat be) so far this season.

During the next three games, those WRs that Weidmann mentioned above, who get wide open as a result of the attention paid to Finley, should be Cobb (and Jones, as well as Driver).

"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

"We're nobody's underdog!"

"We don't play scared!"

by NorthStarr on Dec 17, 2011 3:55 PM CST up reply actions  

Preseason scouting

A few points here. First, with Finley’s less than remarkable season statistically, the Packers may be able to sign him to a three year deal that is favorable financially to the Packers; or at least a contract based on performance plateaus that Finley must reach to get the big coin. Finley would have demanded more last season, despite his injury, based on “potential.” This season serves as a reality check for Finley and his agent, especially with several other tight ends in the league racking up stats that Finley doesn’t approach. Make no mistake, though; TT recognizes the impact Finley has on defenses and will pay Finley accordingly.

Second, I attended a preseason practice at Nitschke Field. I watched a TE drill done right in front of us. Rodgers and Flynn throwing either 10-yard outs or ins to all TEs while the safeties guarded the TEs. No comparison at all between Finley and the other TEs. The safeties had no trouble reading the breaks of the backup TEs and quickly jumping to the TEs’ shoulders for tight coverage. Finley, however, came off the line like a wide receiver. Repetition after repetition, Finley came out of the break with a three yard cushion. He’s so much faster off the line, more fluid, with some shake and bake. On Finley’s last repetition, his move out of the break literally had the safety falling down in the opposite direction.

Finally, Finley’s impact on defenses was clearly visible during the second half of the Viking game. McCarthy repeatedly put Finley out wide by himself, and the Vikings countered with a DB with a safety shaded heavily to Finley’s side. Rodgers was effectively playing 10 on 9 football on the rest of the field. I haven’t seen MM post Finley wide by himself quite that much in any other game, but certainly defenses are shading a safety to Finley regardless of where he lines up. Dude’s a beast and should be signed again. You can’t turn down mismatches.

Nitschke never wore an earring!

by Packer Pete on Dec 17, 2011 7:01 AM CST reply actions  

I wish Finley would not drop so many passes, then it be easy to pay him the big money

I know he doesn’t drop a lot but he drops important ones is what I am getting at.

Wonder if we could get Gronkowski or Hernandez when their contracts are up? Sure hands, and both will be wanting the top TE money. Its New England so they would probably just pay them both the money and as little as possible to the recievers.

by king.nothing on Dec 21, 2011 8:00 PM CST reply actions  

They will likely have more than a few teams fawning over them though. Gronk will get his money from NE, but Hernandez might be attainable.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 24, 2011 8:12 AM CST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


FanPosts


Manager

Img00243_small Kevin McCauley

Editors

Texbucky_small texwestern

Author

Rubberducky_small Mitchell Maurer

Ayrton_senna_1988_canada_small Vermont Cubs Fan

Fallout-3-1010_small PackApologist

Gassertaylor_small OBrienSchofieldismyHero

Linkedin_picture_small Zack Ward

Carson-palmer-hot-dog_small MatthewJStein