Survey: Who's Your Core Group of Twelve?
C.D. picks what he thinks should be the core group of players that Ted Thompson will protect through 2016. Take the survey at the end of the article with your thoughts on who those players should be.
By tundravision
Last week on Cheesehead Radio, we spoke with Albert Breer of the NFL Network, and I broached the subject of Aaron Rodgers' impending monster contract extension. Naturally, I was concerned about the ability of Ted Thompson to be able to continue to re-sign players and keep the team at full strength, especially considering the drop-off the defense has already suffered without Cullen Jenkins and Nick Collins. Said Breer...
"Ultimately, what ends up happening is draft classes come up together, and you have to identify who is a part of your core. The best example you can look at now is..the Indianapolis Colts. Back in their heyday, they identified a group of about a dozen players, signed them to big deals, and filtered the rest through at the other positions. It's really kind of the way it needs to be...you pay them and continue to draft around them. In today's NFL, that's kind of the way it works."
And it makes sense. We've been spoiled for a while during our rebuilding phase under Thompson's draft-and-re-sign-from-within strategy, so much that we've been able to keep a lot of good talent at nearly every position. But with success comes the consequences of many players finding success and noteriety, and thusly wanting to get paid. Simply put, Super Bowl Champions are going to get raided by other teams desperate to capture a piece of that glory, and are willing to pay for it.
And that got me thinking: since we're no longer in a "rebuilding/reloading mode", the Packers are looking to sustain this team for as long as possible. If it comes down to identifying a core group of players, who would you choose? Oh, some of them are obvious, but after that first six, it comes down to picking some nits at times.
So, if I'm picking my core players, here's my scenario. You're looking at players you project to keep on the team as long as they are healthy and productive. These are the players that you are willing to push the bank for, the guys that you will sacrifice luxury elsewhere on the roster to keep. The target year is 2016...who do you build this team around?
Here's my list of my core players.
1. Aaron Rodgers (present contract expires in 2014). Seriously? Do I need to explain this? The kid is going to get paid Brady-like numbers and is going to be the guy this team is built around.
2. Clay Matthews III (2013). Maybe not quite the force he was in his sophomore season, but Thompson loved this kid from Day One and he's easily the face of the Packer defense.
3. BJ Raji (2013). With the issues the Packers have along the defensive front, and not likely to have aging Ryan Pickett around for too many more years, Raji will be the de facto leader on the line.
4. Josh Sitton (2016). Hard not to have this guy on the core list when he's already signed through 2016. But Sitton is a proven lineman who, despite not having the banner year he did in 2010, is certainly one guy from the slough of Thompson mid-rounders early in his tenure that was a hit.
5. Jordy Nelson (2014). Jordy has proven to be the most versatile receiver the Packers have. He can go downfield like Greg Jennings, but can tiptoe the sideline like Donald Driver. He's become the security blanket and the big-play receiver all in one frame.
6. Desmond Bishop (2014). Desmond has established himself on the inside as a player. Regularly outplaying AJ Hawk beside him, he earned his spot and his contract extension earlier in 2011.
7. Tramon Williams (2014) This hasn't been a banner season for Tramon, certainly not like his break-out season a year ago. But with Charles Woodson aging, the Packers are going to need an established veteran on the corner for the long haul.
8. Greg Jennings (2012) This one is a little tricky. Jennings is a legit #1 receiver but can get lost in the crowded number of guys looking for targets. While I still keep him in the core group, the potential of Randall Cobb (combined with Nelson's continued development) could potentially bump him down the list.
9. Bryan Bulaga (2014) No, he hasn't been a world-beater, but he's been consistent and a guy who can anchor one side of the offensive line. Yes, this might be as much on potential as what he's proven so far, but when you've invested a #1 pick on the line, you need him to stick around.
10. John Kuhn (2013) This one is tricky, but since I'm not including any running backs in my top 12, Kuhn's gritty consistency has to be protected. As a fullback, he's never going to command much more than the $2.3M he gets a year under his contract extension, making him a viable team leader at a cap-friendly price.
11. Scott Wells (2011) I struggled with this one. However, you can't deny the year this 30-year old has had. Can he keep it up through 2016 at age 35? Jeff Saturday, one of the core players mentioned by Breer when listing the Colts' core group, has kept it going until age 36 and been a team leader on top of it. Might be hard to afford, and there's a reason Thompson hasn't done an extension yet.
For my last spot, I have a lot of choices: Randall Cobb, Derek Sherrod, James Starks, AJ Hawk, Morgan Burnett, and of course, Jermichael Finley. In reality, I probably don't have to choose or limit myself to 12, as Thompson will make decisions based on the changing circumstances from season to season. I would have easily stuck Nick Collins here, and would have considered Andrew Quarless if injuries hadn't struck their futures in doubt.
It might be my own opinion, not Thompson's, but for my nice, round dozen I will finish with...
12. Randall Cobb (2014). Three wide receivers? No running backs or safeties? Yeah, its a stretch, perhaps. But yesterday's game against the Lions made us all suddenly remember why we drafted Cobb. Sure, its nice to have a guy who can contribute in the passing game, which we have no shortage of, but we quite literally have no one else on this team that can field a kick or a punt, much less do something productive with it. He's going to become more of a focal point of the offense, but this kid would be hard to replace on special teams.
Now, the disagreement can begin. Obviously, some guys like Driver, Woodson, Grant, Clifton, and Pickett just don't project to be around much longer. I strongly considered James Starks, but I don't know if he has really captured the confidence of the coaching staff as yet. Derek Sherrod could easily move in to the top 12 with some consistent development, but we knew he was somewhat of a raw talent when he was drafted this year. Same can be said for Morgan Burnett, especially in lieu of the potential loss of Collins.
The one I expect to take the most heat on is the exclusion of Finley, and its understandable. However, the prevailing logic that I keep hearing out there is to place a tag on him for a year and see where it goes from there. That doesn't strike me as a guy you're willing to shell out to build your team around. He's obviously a tremendous talent, but it was also clear that Thompson has been shoring up the depth behind him for a reason.
So, what do you think? Chime in on the comments and tell me where I've messed up. Or, even better, go here and pick your top 12. We'll reveal the overall top 12 based on your votes on this week's Cheesehead Radio.
Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey, the world's leading questionnaire tool.
Need a little contract information? Check it out here at Rotoworld.
Comments (83)
January 02, 2012 at 09:34 pm
I would have to take Wells and Kuhn out. Wells is too old and a fullback is just not that important in today's game.
I would replace them with Finley and Burnett / Collins depending on Nick's status.
Hopefully, Sherrod and Alex Green will recover from their injuries and make a case to be one of the core by the end of next season.
January 02, 2012 at 09:43 pm
+1 in every detail, but with full confidence for MB - you can't invest money in NC with the neck injury history.
January 03, 2012 at 12:45 am
Great topic CD.
Agree with Jersey Al's take. I like Wells, but centers are usually the least athletic lineman and I believe can be replaced easier. (Nothing personal Scott). Pretty much the same argument at FB.
I know a lot of people are down on Finley, but he makes the whole receiving group better.
We have found out what a healthy Collins means to the secondary. He's still young enough to play a number of years, but alas, I believe the advice from the Doc's will emphasize how risky it would be to resume his career and Nick will reluctantly retire.
Burnett needs to show me more before I sign on with him. Same with Shields, especially with his horrible tackling.
Outside of CM3, Bishop is the closest LB we have to a playmaker, else everyone else is dispensible at this point. D.J. Smith flashes potential however.
On O there is not enough info on Newhouse or Sherrod yet to put them on the list. Lang has played well and could end-up being another Sitton.
Definitely like Jordy and Jennings and also Cobbs potential. Plus Cobb is our best return guy.
Regarding A-Rod, I wonder if he'll take a reduced contract(relative to the elite QB market) to help the team keep more core players. He's smart enough to realize by having better players around him will only enhance the teams success and thus his legacy.
January 03, 2012 at 09:31 am
Doesn't Saine's play kind of make Alex Green expendable? Saine looks to be a solid pass catcher and a decent down hill runner.
January 03, 2012 at 02:35 pm
No reason to make a choice if Grant is gone next season.
January 03, 2012 at 06:10 pm
Exactly.
Plus, my feeling is that Alex Green is going to be a special player..
January 05, 2012 at 08:29 am
No reason to make a choice if Green takes some extra time to rehab and returns in 2013. I quess Grant has one more year in him and he wants to stay in GB.
January 02, 2012 at 09:46 pm
I kept Wells in, I think he could play for another 6 years. I also included Marshall Newhouse, of all people, because he's young, smart, versatile, talented, a great teammate, and is going to keep getting better. This season could have gone south in a hurry without him. He has a great chance of being our left tackle of the future, especially now with Sherrod's injury.
January 02, 2012 at 09:55 pm
I think I'm a bigger Shields fan than many around here, but the kid is young and has boat loads of talent. I think he's worth keeping around.
January 02, 2012 at 11:53 pm
+1 Quality corners are essential in today's NFL, and hard to come by. I think that Shields will prove to be a quality replacement for Woodson.
January 03, 2012 at 12:03 am
Absolutely agree. He has the talent to become one of the best cornerbacks in the NFL at only 24.
January 03, 2012 at 06:13 pm
I think shields could be a very good corner, but I don't know I'm comfortable with your phrasing, "replacement for Woodson"... Shields' play offers very little to compare to Woodson, completely different players. Mostly because as Lebowski points out, Wood's game is physicality, Shields' game is speed.
January 03, 2012 at 09:18 am
The only corner I've seen that's afraid of contact more than Deion.
January 02, 2012 at 09:59 pm
This is a great idea! I can't wait to see the results.
January 02, 2012 at 10:09 pm
Shields and Burnett for sure. Wells will be replaced in the draft this year or next.
January 02, 2012 at 10:11 pm
I think you have to count both Shields and Tramon in this day an age...you can't have enough cover corners...just look at what happens when jarrett bush gets out there.
January 02, 2012 at 10:15 pm
What did I learn from this exercise? I can't call many of our defensive players "Must keeps".
Matthews, Raji, Burnett, and Williams are the only defensive guys I think we -need- to keep on the squad if it means paying a premium for.. I'd like to say Bishop, I love his play, but I don't know that DJ Smith isn't a viable replacement if push came to shove. Burnett makes the cut because he has talent, but moreover, he's the best we have, even if he hasn't realized his potential yet.
Offensively, Kuhn doesn't bring anything irreplaceable or even much needed to this offense. He's a good player, but he's not a must have. Jennings, Nelson, Rodgers, Lang, Sitton, and Bulaga are all must-haves. As much as I'd love to put Finley into the mix, I can't bring myself to make him a must-have- simply because I think with Jennings and Nelson on the perimeter, you can get by with a good blocking TE who's serviceable in the pass game. I'd LOVE to keep Finley, though.
Wells might be must-have because we just don't have a replacement that is anywhere near adequate. His age moving into 2016 makes it a tough sell for me. If I can't take Wells, I have to choose between Cobb and Shields, both based on athleticism and potential. Cobb could be similar to Devin Hester, except he's actually good on offense, too.
January 02, 2012 at 11:59 pm
Agree with you on D, except I add in Shields.
On O, we have so many good receivers, but all have some minuses, or seem similar (e.g. Cobb could be Jennings in a couple of years). For the core you have AR, a couple of key lineman for stability (Bulaga, Sitton and Newhouse?), and then pick from a crop of receivers. They all have their pluses and minuses. The best three are Nelson, Jennings and Finley. I didn't vote that way because I don't know that cap-wise you can really afford all three on top of what AR will get in the next couple of years.
Great topic CD.
January 02, 2012 at 10:17 pm
If Collins is healthy, he is a no brainer. running backs are fungible in today's NFL, so no need to waste big dollars on anyone there.
It would be nice to have another defensive piece or two to build on after Raji, Matthews and Williams.
January 02, 2012 at 10:36 pm
I see GB taking a look at a franchise RB early this April... Can u imagine the possibilities tht this offense could be with an actual RB? Hard to fathom.. I'd look for GB taking one 1 or 2nd round.. Ie Chris Polk (5'11" 225 Washington) Or a Montee Ball (5'11" 210 wisconsin)... Then look OLB in 2nd... If we get a franchise RB, he'll have to be a core player in '12 and beyond
January 02, 2012 at 11:17 pm
I feel pretty good about the Packers' RB stable of James Starks, Alex Green, and Brandon Saine.
I sincerely hope Alex Green springs back from his injury no worse for the wear- I think Green is going to truly surprise and impress an awful lot of Packers fans with a little bit of play time.. I think he's going to be the Packers #1 RB within a season or two. His tape shows that he has made habits of all the little things that mean the difference between a 3 yard carry and a 15+ yard carry.. Really impressed with his explosion as soon as the ball touches his hands when watching him field balls from the jugs machine during training camp, too. 0-60 in no time flat.
.
January 02, 2012 at 11:29 pm
Yeah we're stocked at RB imo. I'd like some DL and OLB.
January 03, 2012 at 04:22 am
I'm a huge Alex green fan, I jumped off the couch when we drafted him and I hope he's our #1 back... Love saines potential, Starks fizzled out with me.. Greens knee is wat scares me. If he's healthy 100% give him the load, if not at 100% by April, I say we gotta invest. A stable of Ball, Green, Saine (leaving Starks out for now) is a damn good power/athletic combo. Starks could be traded bait of needed, he lacks the N-S running habit IMO.. But I also agree we need an impact at OLB and DE
January 03, 2012 at 06:18 pm
I have to say, I think one of the things about Starks' game that I appreciate is that I think he DOES get north n south in a hurry, although I will agree that for whatever reason, he seemed much more hesitant this season than last.
January 03, 2012 at 12:31 am
Don't see it.
January 03, 2012 at 05:14 am
Think a franchise RB would be a waste personally. Our O just isn't set up for one. Our RB's have done the job they've been asked to do this year-Starks and Grant between them have 1137 yards at 4.25 pc and MM has said we are not a hand off to one back 25 times a game team.
I was suprised we spent a 3rd on a RB this year though like Oppy I'm excited by Green's potential. With draft needs at OLB/secondary I'd be shocked if we spent a 1st or 2nd on a RB..
January 05, 2012 at 08:37 am
I'm inclined to think that the running game needs to get more creative and deceitful with the blocking and movement of the runningbacks. The passing game is played this way, why not the running game. This team is a lot of power running without a power line.
January 03, 2012 at 10:56 am
1. We're already stacked at RB.
2. Good luck finding an elite RB that's also great at pass blocking and that is willing to play a role, and not be the key figure, while also not earning a buttload of money.
This is a passing offense. The RB is but an aftertought.
This idea of balance in the NFL is a thing of the past. No team is sucessful nowadays with balance. All teams that have tried to implement balance (Jets, Falcons, Vikings, Cowboys) have failed. You can't be an elite passing AND running team.
Not only for the sake of rhythm and chemistry from the players (Rbs usually need 20+ carries a game to have a big impact, as well as passers and receivers need to build momentum, get a feeling for the defense to really be effective), but as well in roster building, because there's not gonna be enough cap space to adress other positions. Not to mention the serious dificulty in finding complete OLinemen, that can pass block and run block with the same efficiency.
In today's NFL, the salary cap acts as a short blanket. You'll always have areas of weakness. The Packers chose to invest in receiving weapons and in secondary talent, in detriment of the running game and the DL.
January 03, 2012 at 11:50 am
RS your second point sums up my position on the running back spot. Lets face it, this is a passing league and the Packers are set up that way. A prima donna RB could be more of a hindrance than a help in the long run. I'm content right now with any combo of Starks, Saine, Green, Grant, Kuhn or anyone else they find. As long as the RB's understand that the spot-light is on A-Rod and their job is to help make him as successful as possible.
January 03, 2012 at 10:54 pm
People want the RB, but don't ask...
How successful has the OL been in run blocking?
How often would MM call running plays even with a stud RB in the backfield given the fact that AR12 is pulling the trigger and throwing it to a group of sticky handed receivers?
January 02, 2012 at 10:54 pm
I posted this on a different thread, but am interested in knowing what others might have to say about it:
I am a little worried about a report at JSOnline saying that the Oakland Raiders may go after both Reggie McKenzie and Eliot Wolf once the season is over. To lose both of them at the same time would be a pretty big blow to the personnel department. The report says that Ken Herock, who is a good friend of Ron Wolf’s, is lobbying for the Raiders to go after them. Makes me wonder if Ron Wolf himself might have a hand in it….
January 02, 2012 at 11:23 pm
I would have to think the TT isn't going to do this forever, and the Green Bay branch of the Ron Wolf tree isn't going to shrivel up and die when Thompson hangs it up. I wouldn't be surprised if there have already been casual talks about McKenzie moving into Ted's role when he's done, with Eliot Wolf sliding into McKenzie's old post in due time.
Who knows, though. Sometimes these guys just have to strike when the iron is hot.
January 02, 2012 at 11:45 pm
I just hope it's not true. I remember when Mike Holmgren left in '98 with what seemed like the entire Packers front office and coaching staff. The next two years were not great ones for the organization. The Packers current success is built on organizational stability. Makes me a little nervous to think that balance could be upset in '12. Of course, there's no way of knowing--yet--what kind of leader Eliot Wolf might become. He might end up as a mere shadow of his dad. Guess we'll find out one way or another.
January 03, 2012 at 10:52 am
Oppy, you just made me sad. Somewhere deep down I had always hoped that TT could just do this forever.
January 03, 2012 at 06:22 pm
Don't worry, Idiot Fan.. Even if he does retire, I'm sure he'll still drop by the offices at 1225 and put on little impromptu puppet shows and whatnot.
January 02, 2012 at 11:32 pm
I agree with Al, I would also take Wells+Kuhn out and add Finley for sure. Nick Collins would be an easy choice if he were healthy, but who knows if he will ever play again. Therefore as of now, I would choose Randall Cobb. He's already a special return man, and I think he will be a great receiver down the road.
January 03, 2012 at 06:24 pm
Derek, when you say Cobb will be a great receiver down the road, I agree completely..
And I'll assume when you say down the road, you mean "during this post season super bowl run."
January 03, 2012 at 10:09 pm
He very well could be, Oppy. I'm a huge fan of his, and thinks he's gonna be a star for us. Another great pick by Ted Thompson.
January 03, 2012 at 12:15 am
Amazing article idea -- Really gets us involved with the site.
My picks (Of who the Packers need to keep MOST)
1) Aaron Rodgers
2) Clay Matthews
3) Tramon Williams
4A) Jordy Nelson 4B) Greg Jennings
6A) Bryan Bulaga 6B) Josh Sitton 6C) TJ Lang
9) BJ Raji
10) Morgan Burnett
11) Nick Collins (If he can't come back, Desmond Bishop)
12) Sam Shields
I included TJ Lang because I have a feeling he's going to become one of the best guards in the league. Keep in mind, he's only 24.
Speaking of age, Scott Wells turns 31 in a few weeks. We need to find a replacement in the next couple years.
While I say to keep Shields (who I think will turn into a fabulous CB), we need to draft a 3rd CB, as I believe the more talented CBs, the better.
Here's two guys I strongly considered: Mason Crosby and Tim Masthay. Can you imagine how good these two could be with a better special teams coordinator?
January 03, 2012 at 01:19 am
Your list is perfect except I wish there was room for Andrew quarless because I really want him to be our TE someday for the long haul
January 03, 2012 at 05:14 am
I'm a big fan of Quarless as well, Al. But he has a long road back after that awful injury earlier this season. He was really starting to come around, then unfortunately he was lost for at least the rest of this year, and maybe part of next as well
January 03, 2012 at 03:26 pm
I like Quarless as well, but my guess is your looking at 2013 for his return.
January 03, 2012 at 08:51 am
Anthony, my list is the same as yours, only including Finley and Bishop while excluding Collins and TJ Lang. If Collins comes back, then I'd take him, but I'm just not too optimistic about that right now.
Even if we had a better RB, I probably wouldn't include him just because of the way our team works and the way the league works these days.
This was a tough exercise. In retrospect, it just makes me happy to see how many good, young players we have. Try this with the other teams in our division. The list of the Vikings top 12 would only contain 5 names.
January 04, 2012 at 09:37 am
I had the same 12 as you except I added Tim Masthay and dropped Burnett. I just remember how long we waited for a punter. Hard position to replace.
January 03, 2012 at 01:11 am
Why is no one mentioning Lang?? Has he not proven he is our LG of the future. All of our young starting lineman should make the list because you do not break up a good line. Bulaga, Sitton, and Lang are in but Sherrod has not proven he is our future and Wells and Clifton are too old. Wells could have already been replaced if McDonald didn't suck.
January 03, 2012 at 01:16 am
Your list is basically perfect.
January 03, 2012 at 09:37 am
I can't really profess a great ability to judge linemen (beyond the obvious), but by many accounts, Wells was our best lineman this year. If I remember correctly, both Flanagan and Bag O' Donuts played well into their thirties. It's possible that Wells could too.
January 03, 2012 at 10:40 am
A guard shouldn't be a building block.
Sitton, being arguably the best in the league, is the exception.
January 03, 2012 at 03:28 pm
EDS
January 03, 2012 at 01:13 am
I can see bishop being replaceable. On defense I would go Matthews, raji, Williams, shields, and maybe Burnett
January 03, 2012 at 01:22 am
Masthay and crosby must be on teds list
January 03, 2012 at 05:35 am
Really nice article..
Left out Pickett Woodson Clifton on age grounds only.
No brainers for me
1) Rodgers
2) Matthews
3) Raji
rest was more difficult and in no particular order
4) Collins if healthy though sadly I think he may not return if not Burnett.
5) Bulaga
6) Sherrod. I felt he was coming along nicely and I feel that in our O it's easier to plug in a guard rather than a tackle (which is why I give Newhouse a lot of credit for his play this year for all the the struggles)
7) Tramon Williams
8) Jennings
9) Cobb for the reasons CD gives
10)Finley -I know we could get by with Quarless playing like he did this year in the blocking game and like 2010 in the passing game but I really feel that Finely makes the whole offense more dangerous not least in making D's tip their hands..
11) Shields. This D needs 3 quality corners.
and now the controversial pick
12) Mike Neal. I'm going to state my faith in Neal here and now-he's been ineffective this year I know but I have to feel the knee is still troubling him. From that brief bit I saw in 2010 though a healthy Neal I believe could still be a major force in Green and Gold. Bring on the brickbats ;)
January 03, 2012 at 03:33 pm
Hope your right about Neal, the Pack needs a stud with Raji. I like So'oto but I am only looking for him to be someone other than just a guy. I like his effort and effort can make up for a lot of shortcomings.
January 03, 2012 at 07:39 am
Nelson over Jennings?
Seriously?
January 03, 2012 at 08:13 am
Nelson is beating guys with his size, and fewer drops. Jennings is a premiere route runner. To me, Jennings is a top-5 NFL receiver right now, but he will be 33 in 2016. In other words, he is the DD of the 2016 season. Do you pay that guy as one of your core 12 in 2013 if you have to let Finley, Cobb or Nelson go? It is a tough choice, but if you are looking at 2016 I can sure make the argument for "no."
January 03, 2012 at 08:17 am
I like all the Sam Shields mentions. he was my toughest "leave off the list." I just need to see one more year of him before I give him a top-12 nod.
January 03, 2012 at 08:37 am
Agreed in some senses, but after his great 2010 season (where he was arguably one of the most fascinating players because he played so well as a rookie undrafted FA)... I just feel that you have to keep him, even though this year wasn't as good. I think that this year will make him realize what he needs to do to become what his potential roof is. And call me crazy, but I honestly feel he could become one of the best corners in the league. Like Antonio Cromartie, he covers well, but he (probably) is faster, and isn't afraid to get dirty when it comes to tackling. Ever since people got on him for his tackling, he's been trying his hardest to wrap up any guy around him.
January 03, 2012 at 09:43 am
I don't totally understand why the general consensus is that Shields has had a bad year. I understand that he's a little soft in the tackling department, but (subjectively speaking, from my own observation) I feel like I've seen Tramon give up more passing plays than Shields. I would be interested to see some actual numbers to see just what kind of year both Shields and Tramon are having.
January 03, 2012 at 10:36 am
Shields isn't close to Tramon. Shields is a liability playing bump and run, his technique overall is severely lacking, and he isn't as physical tackling.
That being said, it's his 3rd year in the position, he has had little offseason training, he is one of the fastest players in the league, a smart, hard working guy with a knack for the ball.
I didn't list him as a building block, but I can definitely see why someone would. You're not supposed to even be able to play in the NFL is Shields' conditions. Anyone else with so little experience at the position and they would be a huge liability. Heck, look at the Falcons' and the Bears' 3rd stringers...
January 03, 2012 at 10:57 am
Fair enough. I'm not claiming that Shields is at Tramon's level. It's just surprised me this year how much it seems like Tramon is getting beat (again, subjectively). It seems like it's at least as much as Shields, though maybe it just stands out to me more. But anyway, they're both on my list. Shields seems to have more talent than just about anyone we've drafted at CB in the last...I don't know...decade?
January 03, 2012 at 03:37 pm
He's a victim of a very bad defense.
January 03, 2012 at 09:17 am
I put Shields on the list in large part because of the same reason I left running backs off the list. It's because the NFL has become such a passing league that every team should be working on developing several young CBs, and the run game basically doesn't matter any more.
Heck, we have some good CBs on the roster now, and we still can't stop anybody. Maybe I should have left a spot on the list open for "a CB to be named later."
January 03, 2012 at 06:32 pm
Maybe Davon House, we can only hope.
Unfortunately, he was yet again a no-show.
I'm so intrigued by House- is he a well kept secret/diamond in the rough, the Packers just waiting to show him to the world when they are ready, or is he an utter pile of rank garbage they are trying to hide from public view?
Time will tell, and I want to be there to see the outcome.,
JohnRehor
January 03, 2012 at 08:56 am
Great topic CD
For what its worth, here's my top 12:
Rodgers
Matthews
Raji
Nelson
Sitton
Jennings
Shields
Bishop
Bulaga
Cobb
Sherrod
and as my last in, Wells
A tough exercise to try and pick the top 12 players when the talent pool is so deep.
January 03, 2012 at 10:29 am
Soma changes.
While I agree that Nelson and Kuhn are big parts of the offense, Nelson moreso than Kuhn, they don't fit the criteria of players that would leave. TT doesn't need to build the team around them, because they're gonna be here for a long time. These are guys that want to be here even for less money, and have already signed deals that reflect that.
I would also take out Randall Cobb. I think he's a very nice weapon to have, but as with Nelson I don't think he's a key cog.
I would definitely add Finley. What he brings to the table is too valuable, it's something only a handful of guys are able to do nowadays, which is to present a matchup nightmare. Teams play the Packers differently with Finley on the team.
That's also why Jennings should be way ahead, valuing Jordy over him would be a huge mistake.
I agree with Wells, while he's not a young guy, Centers historically have performed way past 35, which would give him at least 5 more elite years of production, enough to warrant consideration as a building block.
The other guy I'd add is Morgan Burnett. The talent is there, and with Collins' injury, he needs to be the key figure in that secondary, he is going to have playcalling duties, and we saw this season that we need better S play. If Collins is able to return to full health, it's him, though.
At last, the LT position needs to be locked. Sherrod is the guy to protect Rodgers' blind side.
My list:
Rodgers
Matthews
Raji
Jennings
Bulaga
Tramon
Sitton
Bishop
Wells
Finley
Burnett/Collins
Sherrod
This would secure at least a key cog in every "layer", QB, OL, WR, DL, LB, DB, except RB, the trully "interchangeable" position in MM's scheme.
January 03, 2012 at 06:35 pm
One can argue that even if Cobb didn't play on offense, he is the absolute key to our return units, and he may be worth plugging into the core players list just for that alone.
January 03, 2012 at 08:39 pm
Special teams isn't 1/3rd of the game, you know...
The Packers ran 988 plays on offense, and 1049 plays on defense. That's 2037 plays.
They've kicked off 110 times. They've punted 55 times. They've returned a kickoff 41 times, and they've returned a punt 27 times. They've attempted 28 field goals, and 69 extra points. That's 330 plays.
For the Packers, ST is roughly 14% of the game. It's not enough to warrant consideration for one of it's members as a building block IMO.
How many franchises have achieved success building around a ST player? The Bears? The Browns? Raiders?
I think if you find quality ST players (returner, kicker, punter) you definitely keep them, but nobody (alive) is going to give a 1st rounder for any of those positions. Even if it's Devin Hester.
You simply do not build around ST.
January 04, 2012 at 08:00 pm
If you have a guy that can substantially shorten the field for your offense on every punt or kick return (or score).. Or a gunner or kicker who can regularly pin down opposing offenses deep in their own territory, that's a big deal- ST's can affect every aspect of the game.
January 05, 2012 at 11:12 am
I agree it's important, but we're talking about building blocks in here.
If you had to pick 12 players to start a franchise, would you honestly pick a gunner or a kick returner?
January 03, 2012 at 10:39 am
Granted this years team proves that its all about offense in the NFL's near future, but its disappointing that in this exercise, it was too easy to consider 12-14 offense candidates and only about 4-6 on defense. I'd like to have that closer to 8 on both sides of the ball to pick 12.
January 05, 2012 at 06:36 pm
"this years team proves that its all about offense in the NFL’s near future"
But, then, There's the San Fransisco 49ers, Keepin' it Old School
Totally agree on preferring a more balanced roster, but I think the nature of drafting and developing BPA means that we'll be seeing a Packers team whose identity will shift from offensive to defensive and back again as the years go on the the available personnel shifts.
January 03, 2012 at 11:01 am
Most points were made, but just as as a food for thought I added Tim Masthay. Loosing the field position battle and allowing big returns over and over again can easily cost you games, especially in the playoffs. ST becomes much more critical in outdoor stadiums, as well. Maybe Masthay is as important as Crosby (or Jarrett Bush, for that Matter), but you just can't ignore STs.
Secondly, I know, Jordy's playing great football as of last, but I wouldn't make him my top receiving-target priority. Jennings, Finley and/or Cobb will be more valuable down the road IMO.
January 03, 2012 at 12:05 pm
My 12:
1. Hawk (Leader of the defense, always in position.)
2. Bush (Leader of the STs, makes Masthay look good.)
3. Flynn (Packer record holder, hello! Also, rating of 124.8 this season, incredible.)
4. H. Green (There's a reason he plays only on running downs.)
5. Peprah (Hits harder than anyone on team, 3rd on the team in tackles!)
6. Francois (His numbers translate over 16 starts to over 100 tackles and 12 INTS. Finally, a LB that can cover.)
7. Wynn (3 of his 19 tackles are sacks, that's called efficiency.)
8. J. Jones (Averages almost 7 YAC per reception, easily tops on the WR core.)
9. Walden (Only man on the team to return a fumble for a TD this season, that's making plays.)
10. Neal (Easily the strongest guy on the team.)
11. Dominguez (At 6'4", 334, he's the closest thing the Packers have to a true "offensive line build." Should be an anchor going forward.)
12. Lee (Finally healthy, starting to really impact the scoreboard.)
Great topic, thanks.
January 03, 2012 at 12:13 pm
Packsmack, I believe the Vikings are eying up your top twelve.
This topic reminds me of Sophies Choice. Which of your children do you let go? OK, so it's not that dramatic.
January 03, 2012 at 03:42 pm
:)
January 04, 2012 at 01:09 pm
Ahhhhh....sarcasm. I get it!
January 03, 2012 at 01:16 pm
My list only goes to seven.
Rodgers
Nelson
Finley
Sitton
Bulaga
Raji
Matthews
If we are looking 5 years ahead I'm just not sure 33 year old Williams, Collins, and Jennings are "MUST HAVES". Right now we have one guy over 30 that is "vital" in Woodson. Personally don't want to be, and don't see TT, paying big money to and playing that many guys of that age in vital spots.
There are some young guys that I hope get to the point where they are in Cobb, Shields, Burnett, and Sherrod but I don't think they are there yet.
Great idea for an article. Should bring up some great conversation.
January 03, 2012 at 03:29 pm
This may be a bit controversial, but I'd seriously look at adding masthay to everyone's list. Wolf learned the hard way ... Reliable punters, and proven cold weather punters especially, are huge in the tundra division ....
January 03, 2012 at 06:39 pm
Special Teams are always overlooked, and I just commented to PackersRS that Cobb could be considered a core player strictly as a ST contributor.
How about this? We go with 12 core players on offense/defense, add in 1 or 2 slots for ST aces, and then throw in Kicker, Punter on top of all that?
I think Crosby has actually proven himself valuable, Mathsay definitely shows talent and promise to say he's a core player.. I think Cobb steals the #12 spot on the offense/defense list...
And, Controversial pick for my imaginary "ST ace" spots?
Ryan Taylor and.. Wait for it....
Jarret Bush.
January 03, 2012 at 03:45 pm
Great read, both artilcle and comments. All I can say is I am glad I'm not TT.
January 03, 2012 at 06:46 pm
It's amazing how young the core of this roster is.
This article inspired me to look at the roster on packers.com's great "How Built" page: http://www.packers.com/team/howbuilt.html
What's crazy about this is that if a few very realistic moves happen this offseason (Driver retires, Clifton retires, Collins retires, Wells/Grant leave in FA), Aaron Rodgers will be the fourth most veteran player on the roster. By my count (probably flawed), only Green, Woodson, and Pickett would have more years (with Kuhn tied).
January 03, 2012 at 10:55 pm
I have to say that I gave one of my votes to Lang. He's been quietly having a phenominal year. Rarely hear his name called for giving up a sack or penalty and has done so unheralded. Good young lineman who is very flexible and reliable so far this year.
January 05, 2012 at 08:51 am
:) love those meat and potatoes guys.