"He may have had no choice."

Well, he had a choice to continue the way they did things before. I hope he finally accepted that they were not going to win a championship that way, and bringing in affordable help is a necessary evil.

That said I have gone from very dubious about this defense to actaully excited. I think that they could finish in the top half of the league and that would be a huge boon to SuperBowl chances.

No way that TT is just rubber stamping someone else's decisions. I don't buy that for a minute. It doesn't mean that with the reorganization of management over the last year or two that there hasn't been someone new whispering in TTs ear, though (or that the NFL-level player evaluation hasn't been improved to increase TTs confidence in it).

I think it was a combination of things. The Packers didn't expect to lose Sam Shields, so he had to be replaced. Davon House was a classic TT move.

Jahri Evans is a repeat of the Saturday signing, but hopefully he has a lot more left in the tank.

The TE position has been a disaster since Finley was forced to retire. This may be the most atypical TT move - signing not one but two quality FAs to stock a position that he had been unable to fix through the draft. If you are looking for proof that TT is more focused on the now, maybe this is your choice.

If you hadn't had the 49ers switching from a 3-4 to a 4-3 you never would have had Brooks and Dial come free this late in the process. In the short run I expect some bumps as they get used to the new system. In the long run I think luck was with the Packers here, and TT was willing to take advantage of the opportunity.

All in all, this does not look like typical TT moves, but there were a strange combination of circumstances all crashing down the same year.

While the number of FA signings was atypical for TT, it's really not that much out of character. The future was not sacrificed for any of these signings.

TT saw the power of having a decent TE last year. He could even compare performance when healthy vs without Cook. I think it made it real easy to see the importance of a good TE for Rodgers.

Then the packers got lucky with 49ers switch over to 4-3. Clear upgrades over the guys they let go. Although you have to wonder about trading Elliott. They spend all that time developing a player, then the other team will reap any rewards.

Just hoping he continues the trend by picking up a F.A. or two for the OL.
You can't leave the most valuable player in the league defended by a shallow, injury prone line.

That's powerful stupid.

No, I don't think TT is all in. Depends on your definition, I suppose. These 7 FA signings all look pretty prudent and low risk. TT is still leaving a considerable amount to carry over into 2018. I don't see us mortgaging of the future or coming real close to that line as of yet, which is my definition.

It also depends on what TT thinks or knows about AR and his demands for his extension. If AR is really going to demand $32M AAV, and if his cap hit for 2018 is going to increase by $8M or $10M, GB could be in a world of hurt, unless there is a massive increase in the cap.

We already might need for 2018 a starting RG, #2 WR, a rotational #3 OLB (and maybe a starting OLB depending on CM3), a starting OC (probably Linsley for good-sized bucks) a utility interior OC/OG, a swing OT, a #1/#2 CB, perhaps a slot WR, and perhaps a #2 QB.

As dire as that all sounds, there are lots of possibilities for internal replacements at all these positions. TT will have a draft, or he might find more perfectly adequate stop gap FAs like I hope Evans and Brooks will prove to be. If we need a starting OLB and slot WR because CM3 and Cobb didn't perform, we'll pick up $20M in cap savings, though that would be a bummer because if we cut those 2 we lose out on comp picks.

“What changed this year was it seemed like some of our guys left that we would normally have signed and it just didn’t work out. At the same time, we had opportunities that we haven’t had in the past to sign a couple of guys that we felt like could help our team.”

In numbers, and most of the time position, Ted has basically replaced those FA's (and Shield) that he lost or traded (Elliott).

Sometime earlier, someone posted what the FA's we lost cost versus what we paid for our signings. I believe what Ted paid for the additions was substantially less than what the departures made.

If what the FA's sign for represents "market" then you can say Ted wasn't willing to pay market for those leaving. He was able to get replacements on cheaper deals.

This is exactly the opposite of being "all in".

Not saying I don't like many of the moves, but Ted is mostly replacing positions that left. It's not an all out one year run for the SB as many are claiming. No big break-the-bank big name signing. And going forward, future draft-picks wise and cap wise the team is more conservative than ever.

Put another way, if Ted had resigned all of GB's departing FA's this year would anyone be say he's "all in." His reshuffling of the deck with new faces is distorting perceptions.

I think the better argument is not whether Ted is "all in" as much as has Ted's philosophy of using only "his guys" been infused with a more league-wide player procurement inclusiveness.

The all in statement was from Rodgers. To me, that is a statement to the organization to bring together a sufficient team to make a run for the Super Bowl. There are many ways to do that. You can go all out at the beginning of free agency and spend big bucks. You get a few players. I am good with how TT did it. Pick a few players at the beginning (Bennett & Kendricks) and then pick up good players like Evans, Brooks and Dial to round out your squad when they are available and are not high priced. OL is another place to try to do that. What I don't want to happen is there are not enough good backups ready and end up like last year again. Some may think we have squandered the last 7 years of not putting a good enough team around Rodgers to win another Super Bowl. We may have 5 or 6 years still with Rodgers at the helm and with the opportunity to get to the Super Bowl. The all in strategy is get enough players to win. 2014 may have been a year, but 2016 was lost because of the defense. TT needs to avoid the urge to sit tight and see what happens. Can't keep waiting for next year if things go awry like in 2016.

Tinkerin Ted scheming again!

TT hasn't changed his strategy at all... he has always signed free agents that 1.) wouldn't negatively impact the cap beyond their value 2.) would have a negligible effect on compensatory picks 3.) still have a juice left in the motor 4.) bolstered depth at positions of need.

The only difference between this year and last is there simply was more FA that fit that mold. I don't ever think TT has ever been adverse to signing free agents he just chooses to sign his own vs. breaking the bank on a player from another team. Besides when you sign your own FA's you know they work in your locker room, scheme, and you know their off the field character. Other FA's from other teams leave question marks in those departments.

Over time, most of us would grow as people, workers or managers. Ted came in with a philosophy at a certain point in the modern NFL game and had success. He worked his formula and now is adapting. Good on him.

As many have pointed out, we lost a lot of guys through FA. Most were on the last legs of helping this team. Ted, his team and the coaches recognized that homegrown and draft wasn't going to get us to a Super Bowl. At least they made changes to their approach and we filled some gaps. He is a little late to the game that other organizations have mastered (New England). Let's hope that these additions work out or TT will be blamed for a new crime.

In the modern era, the only thing a team is sure to get when going "all in" is an extended stay in salary cap hell. Every year, teams overspend so they can chase that trophy. Even they DO make good choices and DO improve for a while, they all have to pay the piper eventually.

I like the Packers' approach. I'd rather see enjoyable, competitive football every week, year after year, than having three good season followed by five years of suck. What's the point of buying a superbowl once every ten years if it means you're going to suck for 7 of the years in between?

How 'bout we all admit that we don't have a friggin' clue what TT was thinking?

<p>He may be going all in because he plans to retire after this season.</p>

Ringo claimed by the Bengals....

<p>Ted has a winning formula, it was based on making the best draft pick in NFL history when he picked Aaron Rogers when 23 passed and has been building a team around him ever since. We copped one SB, just missed going to another and were one game away last year. We have been to the party 8 years in a row. Despite the repeat debacles we always see on defense that leave you fuming, &nbsp;I can&#39;t dog Ted too hard, I remember the lean years. These SF pickups may make the difference, they ain&#39;t no slim Pinkins off waivers. &nbsp; &nbsp;</p>

<p>It always amazes me that we have people who have continued to question the decisions of our GM. 8 years in a row in the playoffs, 2 out of 3 years playing for NFC championship,all accomplished while drafting between 20 and 32 every year. TT is all in every year. He doesn&#39;t &nbsp;play the shiner new object syndrome of free agency. Just look at the Vikings. They overpay for Boone and cut him a year later. Big cap hit ! &nbsp; They overpay for 2 OT this year and will probably have a worse O line. There maybe a time where we will long for a GM and HC &nbsp;as good as we have now. Since I have been a packer fan longer than most of you have been alive, enjoy the success. I remember winning one game in the late 50&#39;s and celebrating.</p>

The change was triggered by a short discussion Ted, Mike and Dom had last year after the Packers had no running backs, having to convert a WR and had no CBs having to play Safeties and a former free agent WR as cover corners.

MM: "Ted, WTFO!"

TT: "Mike, okay, I hear yah. Chill Bro! I still think our boys can mature and save the day this year, but just to make you happy, Hey Eliot, go get me a water and take a look at some 49ers you said we could poach next year. BTW, you and Brian got great intell during your GM interviews. Ha, ha, ha. "

DC: "Ted, I can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear. I need help NOW!"

TT: "Say again Dom."

DC: "Give me some help in the secondary or we're gonna get lit up like a f’ing Christmas tree."

TT: "Ah Christmas, my favorite time of the year . . . all the lights. . . . Let's just see how our boys do in the play-offs. We'll be okay . . Eliot, where’s my water?"

TT being a draft and develop GM is fully aware you cannot plug every so for hole if you roster for players leaving in free agency with draft picks and he has even admitted as much in previous years. We happened to haveit's of attrition in FA this last year, so when you look at the shear number player for player it really is not that Big of a devotion. Where TT have deviated this year is putting in waiver claims this close the regular season, we received one which means he likely out it claims for other as well.

Just wait this till after this year the amount of FA. Lindsley, Evans, DA, Burnett, House, Janis, Gunter, McCray, Barclay, Brooks, Dial( I think), RJF, Richard Rodgers, Goode, Thomas

<p>Can you make possible text from rich text editor in comment section or remove that feature completely!</p>

<p>First off everyone assumes that if TT doesn&#39;t sign anyone...he didn&#39;t even try. Not the case, because every year he&#39;s trying to make deals with players that could make a difference. He won&#39;t risk his salary cap for paying too much for marginal guys. That is a good thing, Now this past year he did have a lot of guys leave the Packers and needed replacements. The biggest being the TE spot where he doubled down on two players.</p>
<p>Green Bay has had a playoff team for many years, so their roster wasn&#39;t that bad...just not good enough to win a SB. So TT adds a few replacement players for those that have left and a few more where the team is still weak. While it may seem to be a huge change of operation, I think two things made it happen:</p>
<ul>
<li>
Too many core players left in FA that needed to be replaced</li>
<li>
Salary cap ramifications were acceptable for him to proceed.&nbsp;</li>
</ul>
<p>I also think like many he saw this year that with adding a player like Brooks, who was a FA, he could provide enough manpower to push the Pack to the SB with any luck.</p>
<p>Of course this is just my guess.</p>