Cory's Corner: Ted Thompson gave himself options

Ted Thompson shocked the world on Monday.

After signing Julius Peppers in 2014, Thompson opted to swallow hard and sign Jared Cook.

But it’s not just the addition of a player that instantly is the best tight end on the roster.

It gives Thompson plenty of options on draft day.

He also preaches the importance of picking the best available, something that often gets lost with other teams.

Now that he has added Cook to the fold, if the draft takes a few unprecedented turns next month, Thompson has choices.

And if that means that Arkansas tight end Hunter Henry falls to the Packers at No. 27, then he should feel the need take the highest rated tight end in the draft.

Now you’re probably thinking, why would Thompson waste a first rounder on a tight end if he just signed a free agent tight end? Because Cook only signed a one-year prove it deal.

Cook will turn 30 on April 7, 2017. He’s betting on himself that a year with Aaron Rodgers will shine up his pedestrian career stats and pave the way for big dollars.

There’s no way that Thompson will give Cook a lengthy contract no matter how many touchdowns Rodgers throws his way.

Or maybe Thompson wants to roll the dice with arguably the draft’s best defensive talent in Mississippi tackle Robert Nkemdiche — who also has plenty of off field problems. Or perhaps Thompson surprises everyone and trades up to take Alabama inside linebacker Reggie Ragland.

The Cook signing was big for an offense that spun its wheels at times last year. But it also helped out Thompson because the NFL Draft just became even more interesting. 

-------------------

Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He recently earned his Masters degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter: @Coryjennerjohn

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (79)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
marpag1's picture

March 29, 2016 at 07:02 am

Sorry, but for Ted Thompson to sign Jared Cook to a relatively low money deal after three weeks of free agency is hardly "shocking the world." To the contrary, it is the very definition of TT's usual modus operandi in free agency. Fake, manufactured drama is not drama.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

March 29, 2016 at 07:10 am

Yeah but setting aside that one line the article is spot on.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

March 29, 2016 at 07:16 am

To a certain degree perhaps. But even if Thompson had not signed Cook, it is entirely possible that TT could have said, "Look, Richard Rodgers is good enough, and I don't need to reach for a tight end when there are better players on the board." In that sense, Thompson has exactly the same options with or without Jared Cook.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 07:53 am

I think this deal was done because of Mike McCarthy, not because of Ted Thompson. I read that Packers offered Jared Cook 2 year deal, but he decided to turn down that offer and went for one year prove himself contract... He was relatively cheap, so I think Ted said - ok, Mike wants him, lets sign him and see what happened...
This year draft will be even more unpredictable in comparison with last year draft. I think nobody can see what will happen and whom will be picked by Ted in first 3 rounds...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

March 29, 2016 at 09:04 am

I can't really agree with you. Cook has speed to split the seam that RR doesn't have. The difference in yards per catch is huge - about 2.5 yards. YAC was 3.8 v. 5.5 - and that's with some pretty lousy QBs, which I would argue = less accuracy = more difficult to get YAC. So Cook is better than any TE the Packers currently have on the roster. There is also no TE on the roster other than RR who is proven at all.

In this scenario TT was going to either neglect the position or feel pressured to take the TE if BPA was close. Now he can take a purely developmental speed TE and not worry about getting any production out of him this year, and it will not necessarily hurt the team. Could he have said, "heck with it RR is enough." Yeah, but it would have been a bad move and TT knew it.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

March 29, 2016 at 10:49 am

Fair enough, Mark. I will agree that Cook is certainly the more athletic, and that he will threaten the deep middle more than Rodgers ever could. I don't know if that necessarily makes him better. There is also something to be said for reliability and moving the chains. For the record, I've said that I like the Cook signing, but only after I saw that it was for a reasonable price (at least in my opinion).

I don't think it's so far-fetched to think that the Packer offense could have done very well with "just" Richard Rodgers and no Cook. The Packer offense has been near the top of the league for years, and for much of that time they have not had a stud TE. Even Finley doesn't classify as a stud TE in my mind, and the Packers never seemed to miss a beat even when Finley was out with injury (cf. Super Bowl in 2010).

If the Packers feel that Nelson will be himself again, or that Montgomery will be healthy, or the Lacy will be rejuvenated, or that the O-line won't have as many nagging injuries, or any combination of the above, I don't see why it's so unreasonable to go into the season with a guy like Rodgers,

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 10:59 am

"I don't think it's so far-fetched to think that the Packer offense could have done very well with "just" Richard Rodgers and no Cook. "

All you have to do is look at 2014 to prove your point. Top 10 (I believe, definitely top 20) offense all time and rookie Rodgers and Quarless as TEs.

2015 was a perfect shit storm. As you point out, injuries to WRs, Lacy's conditioning, pretty much every linemen having a down year, Rodgers battling knee injury/confidence/attitude/mechanics/whatever...I think it was more a blip than a sign of things to come.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 11:39 am

In all honesty, an explosive type of TE is a bit of a luxury to have. Is it needed? It really depends on the team. Packers 2011 offense was the most explosive offense they had and that was with Finley opening up the outside for the WR's. 2014 they didn't have Finley or anything like him, but Nelson and Cobb formed one of the best duo's in the league.
Last years team was a perfect shit storm. I mean losing your top 4 WR's to injuries, is an anomaly.

Going through last year though did show that the team was lacking a presence in the middle of the field. Rodgers is fine as a chain mover type of TE and they can get by with him. But he is not a threat that is going to command respect from safety's or force other teams to adjust their defense to stop him.
Also, why just get by with something when you have the ability to add something that could potentially take the team over the top. I mean adding a big explosive target that can threaten the middle of the field and draw attention from the safety's will really help the WR's out.

I think its a really good signing.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

March 29, 2016 at 12:44 pm

Problem is that Quarless is not signed. He is also coming off a surgery. And even then, I'm not sure we've heard the last of the whole gun-charge thing. You can't go into the season with only one TE who has proved he can play meaningful minutes.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 30, 2016 at 07:51 am

Exactly. I mean RR and Perillo!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:17 pm

Evan, 2014 we had Jordy, and a healthy Cobb. World of difference and who knows how quick Jordy will get back to speed among other things.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:48 pm

Of course. Two things I fully expect to have in 2016.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 30, 2016 at 07:52 am

Sure hope so. And some OL health.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 29, 2016 at 07:38 pm

Absolutely. I was hoping just that. No way could he just go with RR and a bunch of unprovens. Just like last year because Q was hurt.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LeagueObsrvr's picture

March 29, 2016 at 01:19 pm

The notion that Green Bay would use their pick at #27 to take a tight end in this draft is laughable. Hunter Henry, the guy that Packer fans seem to be so enamored with, I believe, will fall out of the first round, and there is a high probability that he will be available again at the bottom of the second.
The Packers, in my biased view will take a defensive lineman with their first pick.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

March 29, 2016 at 10:12 pm

That's why I think this signing is important. This TE class is so weak that TT needed to look to FA. There will be no pressure to use a pick on a TE in the first three rounds now.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 30, 2016 at 07:53 am

And that is huge. Wonder what next year's TE class will be like.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
cpheph1's picture

March 30, 2016 at 03:20 pm

I don't understand why somebody gave you a dislike...but I'm starting to get used to troll commenting here at times. Regardless, I agree with your comments. I'm not in favor of drafting the TE @ 27 and I'm hopeful for drafting a LB or DL..third option is a swing OT.

At LB my dream is a CM3 potential impact player. We still have Peppers to potentially replace & possibly Nick Perry and/or Datone Jones in 2017...so IMNSHO, LB (preferabiy a pass rusher type) that has some "juice" is a guy we need (a young clay like) . A dominate DL to team with Daniels would be just as good. Those are the two biggest needs in my thoughts...

I'm looking forward to seeing who Ted takes and nothing he does will shock me...I don't think. ;) From what I've read the draft is supposed to be deep at DL and that plays in Ted's favor. If he doesn't get the pass rusher in the top three picks I'll have to assume he's going to resign Peppers / Perry / Jones (at least one or two of them).

Go Pack Go!

P.S. I might be crazy but what if Ted drafts Notre Dame LB J. Smith #27? LOL!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
slit's picture

March 29, 2016 at 06:50 am

Nkemdiche = Hell No

Give me Rankins, Billings, or Butler on the DLine. If they go LB, Darron Lee should be the pick; Ragland isn't great in coverage.

1 - Rankins or Billings DT
2 - D Jones LB
3 - Westerman OG
4 - Higbee TE
4 - Perkins RB
4 - Schobert LB

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 07:08 am

Honestly, I would like that draft if that's how it ended up.

I would say though if they had a chance to get Jerell Adams, I would take him as well.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:05 am

Yeah I agree swap out Higbee for Adams .....take billings in the first cause rankins will be gone for sure. Trade D jones for Brothers or By some miracle Cravens other than that yeah exactly the same haha. Oh n I'll take Ferguson at RB.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:22 am

I do like Ferguson at RB.

Another guy that in the 3rd-4th round area that I would love to see the Packers look at is Jatavis Brown - LB, Akron. He is similar to Cravens, but more of a pure LB. He has amazing instincts and can hit. He plays a lot bigger then his size. He ran a 4.47 40 at his pro day.

Watch the 4th Quarter of the NFLPA bowl game and you will see why I really like him.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

March 29, 2016 at 09:09 am

I prefer Higbee to Adams if only because I think that Adams has a higher potential to bust. I like Higbee's background as a WR which hopefully gets him a better run on the route tree.

I've developed a bit of a draft crush on Ben Braunecker, TE, Harvard. He tested through the roof at the combine and has a reputation for being a tough SOB. Most questions deal with level of play, so he could be a terrible bust, too. Doesn't have the length that you get from a Vannett, Higbee or Adams.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

March 29, 2016 at 07:59 am

Ragland is a 4-3 middle linebacker only. Lee was a finesse player in College, I'm dubious he's tough enough to play with the adults.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:46 am

I disagree: I see him as the "take-on" LB in a 3-4. That really limits his value to a 3-4 team, though.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

March 29, 2016 at 09:59 am

If someone wants to spend a first round pick on a two down player then sure.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

March 29, 2016 at 10:28 am

Agreed. I would cringe if the Packers took him at #27, although his grade is so high, it might be hard to pass on him. You've got to believe he's going to be a 3-down guy to take him at that spot and I just don't see it.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 30, 2016 at 12:15 am

Ragland didn't drop into coverage very often for Alabama. On passing downs Bama rushed him a lot. You've got to watch a lot of tape to see a decent amount of times that he drops into coverage, and even then on the draft breakdown tapes one loses sight of him. Coverage isn't going to be the strength of his game, but I think he can be okay in coverage. He probably will be pulled in passing situations, especially early in his career, but if the offense is playing hurry up and Ragland can't be pulled, it is not the end of the world as he will be okay at it. Not a ringing endorsement of his coverage abilities, but I do not mean it to be.

He does have nice instincts, sheds blockers, and when he hits a RB on a solo tackle, the RB stops moving forward. It is beautiful to watch. I like Ragland as a 1st round choice; that said, I'd take Rankins, Billings, maybe Reed, instead if one of them are available.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
cpheph1's picture

March 30, 2016 at 03:28 pm

What would you do if your three DL & Ragland are gone?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 31, 2016 at 02:34 am

Imbibe rum and coke in copious quantities? I do not have my notes with me, so going on memory. I would really like an OLB, so Lawson or Dodd would probably work, and I am intrigued but not sold on Darron Lee but I have not watched much tape on him. Conklin would work at OT. Butler and Clark might be fine. If all my favs are gone, someone dropped. Fuller is interesting at WR. Our depth at CB would not stop me from taking Alexander at CB. I really believe that there are about 25 legitimate first round talents this year, so with a couple of reaches, maybe QBs, there should be someone good at #27.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 06:59 am

Long story short: signing Cook doesn't change anything.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 30, 2016 at 01:02 am

I think it is going to change the defensive looks we see this year. I think this signing will help our offense be better. But because it is a 1 year deal, I suspect that it will not change TT's decisions much on the draft (but who knows what TT thinks). The 2017 crop of TEs even with Howard and Jake Butt doesn't look that special from what I've read.

I do think the signing of Starks for 2 years is significant for the future and on our draft. The 2017 crop of RBs looks outstanding, maybe spectacular, including the talent for featured backs. Should TT draft say Prosise, Ferguson, or Drake, as the scat back 3rd down type, or even Lasco, Ervin or Marshall, I have to wonder what TT will do with Lacy.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

March 30, 2016 at 07:07 am

Yea - I was just referring to the draft.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 07:17 am

Signing Cook does give the Packers some flexibility in the draft. They don't have to try and draft a TE early in the draft. If one they like falls to them in a round, they could definitely go after him, but right now they don't have to reach for one, or trade up for one.

It's not a drastic change though. If Thompson finds a TE he likes, he will likely still draft one.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

March 29, 2016 at 07:58 am

I don't think Thompson would have reached for a TE before either.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:07 am

not necessarily reach, but possibly traded up or down to get into position to take one.
They don't have to try and go get one now. If one falls to them great.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Handsback's picture

March 29, 2016 at 07:55 am

Cook provides depth and another option for Rodgers. If one of their current young TEs or drafted guys makes a big jump....bye, bye, Cook.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

March 29, 2016 at 07:56 am

Credit where credit is due. We needed a tight end with some size and speed - we got one. We got a good TE coach to complete the picture. Seems that the coach and GM have been trolling this site. Some good moves here.

I am surprised that we are now under $10 million cap space. With some FAs still outstanding, a draft class to sign and some reserve, it seems like we are cutting it close. I don't know what people think when they advocate signing all these free agents but it seems like we are tightly managed. Kudos to Russ Ball and TT for keeping us in good shape.

As for Henry Hunter in the 1st round, let's hope that cooler heads prevail and we don't throw another first rounder away.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:02 am

" I don't know what people think when they advocate signing all these free agents"

All what free agents? People where asking for a moderately priced ILB or TE. I've read almost every comment here and no one was asking TT to break the bank on expensive players.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:27 am

Sorry, I imagined it.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:08 am

For all those advocating Z Brown I'll take a Kentrell Brothers type in the draft over him all day. And I know many have written him off but if we could get Scooby in the 3rd or 4th round I think it would be an absolute steal.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:23 am

I would take Jatavis Brown over Scooby. Just my opinion.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 30, 2016 at 12:19 am

I don't like Scooby at all. Hard pass all 7 rounds. JMO.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:32 am

Its not Jared cook, its the philoshy of assigned playing time based on your draft status. Seems Mike is hell bent to make sure Ted's top picks get the playing time regardless of whether they suck or not.
I mean Rogers is slower than molases and can't block. Davante Adams is so hit and miss you can't rely of them, yet both had huge amounts of play time compared to Abaderis and Janus et al.
Starks bench sat while fat ass eddie went through the motions.
Its the only explanation I can conceive of, make Ted look good.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

March 29, 2016 at 10:54 am

I just don't see it.

I will grant you this: It's reasonable to wish that MM had given Abby and Janis more snaps over Adams, and sooner. To be fair, though, we'd also have to note that neither Abby nor Janis had ever done anything in a real game before, and Adams did (during his rookie season at least). But I won't argue if you say Abby and Janis should have played earlier.

I disagree with the Richard Rodgers example, because Rodgers was clearly our best TE. Did you want to see non-stop Justin Perillo? And there is absolutely no reason for us to think that Backman knows the difference between a football and a water bottle. So your only other option is to go without a TE in favor or WRs (or RBs), and I think we might agree that Packer receivers didn't exactly light the world on fire last year either.

I also disagree with the Lacy/Starks example. "Fat Ass Eddie" - even while "just going through the motions" - had the same per carry average as Starks (4.1), and Lacy had a better yards per reception number (9.4 to 9.1). And Starks actually had MORE offensive snaps than Lacy did (528 to 471). So how does that show that MM favors the higher draft choice?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 30, 2016 at 12:23 am

"...no reason for us to think that Backman knows the difference between a football and a water bottle." LOL. thumbs up.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
zoellner25's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:48 am

I don't think Cook changes draft strategy/flexibility at all. Cook is on a one year deal. Drafting a player is a 4-5 year commitment.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:32 pm

This year I think it changes a lot. It enable us to potentially wait til next year to draft a TE or even find another FA. So now if one happens to fall this year to later rounds, we could draft one and still preserve our higher picks for DL, ILB and OL.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Kyle Graham's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:50 am

I really hope we draft Jaylon smith. This is a perfect opportunity for our team to draft him and let him sit a year. It would be like having a top 5 pick, just a year later. Maybe I'm in the miniority here but I think we will be fine with Ryan and Barrington at mlb this season. If it's truly best player available and he's available, smith is the best choice imo

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 09:36 am

Where would you draft Smith? in round 1?

In all honesty, We can get by again with what we had at ILB. With the rotation of Ryan, Barrington, Mathews and Thomas.

But it would be really nice to upgrade. To have a player that can play all 3 downs and that is more of a play maker. Its been a while since we have had a true play making type of ILB.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

March 29, 2016 at 11:52 am

It's all a function of how his knee is checking out. If you legitimately believe there's no nerve damage and he's going to recover with no real ill effects, he goes before the Packers are on the clock at #27. If he's still there at #27 and you believe there's no long-term ill effects, he'd be hard to pass on. There's enough depth in this draft at DT that you can still get a good player in round 2 to help bolster the DL.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 11:18 am

If he's there in round 3, go for it.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
cpheph1's picture

March 30, 2016 at 03:38 pm

Anything is possible...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

March 29, 2016 at 10:58 am

Options are roads with arteries where some cost more for toll and a couple of free rds that may take longer. The route one takes depends on need or desire etc to get to another point.
The NFL is a road that year after year each traveler needs to analyze the how, cost, why, desire, urgency to get somewhere and which path is right for them. These arteries are always the same but cost, willingness to pay and the deception of some can make the arrival point twice as hard and far but no way is or did Thompson create a new option with this Cook deal.
Thompson knows the road map pretty well and this is his usual taking of a path that merely works as an Alka seltzer to calm an upset stomach and that stomach likely belongs to MM.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

March 29, 2016 at 12:08 pm

Your posts are well written but I do have to read them at least twice. They are well thought out and, generally, I agree with your perspective - I think. Either way, I always enjoy the road.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

March 29, 2016 at 12:39 pm

Like a good carpenter measures twice before cutting, reading twice will usually make a clearer view of the thought....for those who know there is always more than the perceived face value or the cover of a book and a desire to obtain it. : )

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 11:32 am

Can we add a third "reaction" option just for Taryn's posts? "Thumbs up' and "thumbs down" don't really suffice. I'm thinking a "uhhhh....wha?" option.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 11:42 am

how about this?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 11:49 am

ha...perfect!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

March 29, 2016 at 12:16 pm

Try as I may and will likely to continue, in trying to have some of the beliefs spouted via blind and clique mandated agreements of those (homers) is as preposterous as my comments are purposely written and receive the very reaction as mentioned....' whoa, what, huh, smh etc', though disagreement to the ideology of the clique is pounced upon with ' you're no fan or derogatory verbage' for simply being realistic and unafraid to call crap as crap.
Therefore I have no reason not to make a point with a nonsense theme since logic exists not in the mind of pure homers. : )

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 12:21 pm

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

:)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
murphy's picture

March 29, 2016 at 12:39 pm

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 12:40 pm

Yea...no idea.

But it's all in good fun.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

March 30, 2016 at 09:21 am

Although I've criticized the content of Taryn's post, I've never questioned his/her fandom. It's simply my opinion that if the Packers were managed as Taryn wishes, the team would continually have salary cap problems and would not have had nearly as many wins over the past two decades.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
cpheph1's picture

March 30, 2016 at 03:39 pm

+10

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Duke Divine's picture

March 29, 2016 at 12:31 pm

Tinkering Ted scheming again!!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
J0hn Denver's Gavel's picture

March 29, 2016 at 01:04 pm

"Tinkering Ted" and "Mashed Potato Mike" are hands down the stupidest nicknames I've ever heard.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

March 29, 2016 at 02:32 pm

Free agency is over in Green Bay, Karlos Dansby to the Bengals.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 02:49 pm

Maybe they'll cut Hawk and we can bring him back.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

March 29, 2016 at 04:43 pm

Ok, Evan. First you remind us of the '10 - '11 RB group and now AJ Hawk. Enough is enough. Lol

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 07:35 pm

Ha! Just call me the ghost of disappointing Packers past.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

March 29, 2016 at 11:28 pm

Is Hillman visiting Green Bay? I have seen reports saying he is and others saying he was just talked about as an option.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
holmesmd's picture

March 29, 2016 at 03:04 pm

Hillman or Brown?;)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
AgrippaLII's picture

March 29, 2016 at 07:36 pm

Thompson shocked the World? Is this the first year you've covered the Packers? This is a typical TT free agent signing...it doesn't count against Comp picks and it's at Ted's price. As for draft options...it doesn't change a thing. Ted wasn't going to draft a TE in the early rounds anyway. Need and the value of the pick don't match up...he'll have to trade back to make that happen...and he'll be passing up better players at other positions if he does. That doesn't fit Ted's M.O. of BPA.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:39 pm

Yes the day he signs a FA on day one will be a shock. A double shock because he would also be paying twice what he normally does. Now that would be a shock heard around the world.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 29, 2016 at 08:46 pm

Cow where are you? On sabbatical?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

March 30, 2016 at 07:08 am

A lot of has been said about Cook's drops - but I'm more curious about his stupid penalties - false starts, holding, etc...

Does any site track penalties per player?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

March 30, 2016 at 09:45 am

Who needs you guys! I found it myself: http://www.nflpenalties.com/position/tight-end?year=2015

2015: 3 penalties for 25 yards (#27 for TEs) 1 illegal use of hands, 1 false start, 1 illegal motion.
2014: 5 for 42 (#7)
2013: 3 for 13 (#32)
2012: 2 for 15 (#46)
2011: 5 for 45 (#9)
2010: 3 for 30 (#27)

So, yea, doesn't seem to be egregious at all.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

March 30, 2016 at 12:01 pm

TT drafts TE's with 1st 2 picks, lmao.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0

Log in to comment and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.