Packers News, Transactions, Trade Talk - Jaire Released

[MVP2110]

Should we sign Rasul Douglas?

As depth maybe, but he was pretty bad last year

[th87]

Sucks to lose Jaire but even with a restructured incentive laden deal he very likely would have been gone next offseason anyways. So we trade one year of diminished superbowl hopes for better cap management and player development for the future.

The Packer way for perpetual bridesmaid status.

[Isocleas2]

Sucks to lose Jaire but even with a restructured incentive laden deal he very likely would have been gone next offseason anyways. So we trade one year of diminished superbowl hopes for better cap management and player development for the future.

The Packer way for perpetual bridesmaid status.

It takes two to get married, I don't think the groom (Jaire) was interested in staying in this relationship.

Anyways this is the age old debate we have every year, and especially at the end of Favre/Rodgers time here. Is it better to mortgage the future for a better chance at a superbowl now, or to maintain a balance where we're always in the playoff conversation but never truly go "all-in". The later of which has worked out pretty well for the Packers these last 30 or so years.

I can see both points of view tbh, so I don't fault people's stances either way.

[Matches Malone]

Not great hearing about Kalen King in a cast...

Good to see Elgton there. Hopefully they can re-do his deal and get him going.

John Williams out again. I hope we don't have another Cole Madison situation on our hands.

Read on Twitter

[Ron Swanson]

I'd gladly bring Rasul back on a 1-year for depth purposes. Feels like they need to do something here. I get that we can trot out the "we were actually pretty good without Jaire" thing, but the metrics were kind of a mixed bag. We were a Top-8ish defense by EPA, but Bottom-8 in allowed completion %, and bottom-10 in success rate. Being a mediocre pass rush (12th) and living off of INT's/turnover generation (4th) is historically not a consistent and predictive formula for defensive success. One minor injury to Nixon or Hobbs and the secondary depth looks incredibly suspect. I'd really like to avoid a potential "We're starting Ladarius Gunther and Quinten Rollins at corner in a playoff game" situation.

[Matches Malone]

Interesting development. Maybe his brother gave him some tips this spring.

Read on Twitter

[MickeyDavis]

Read on Twitter

[MickeyDavis]

Read on Twitter

[ReasonablySober]

Read on Twitter

[MickeyDavis]

Bakhtiari was 29 when he got his last extension. And then played 13 of 51 games and was released with one year to go on that 4 year deal.

Jenkins is 29. I just hope we don't get into another similar situation where he breaks down. If/when he gets a new deal I would only add 2 years onto the remaining 2 years. I'm not going beyond his age 33 season.

[ReasonablySober]

Good move for Melton IMO. With the WR crunch on the roster and a need for depth at DB he could possibly earn himself a spot.

[MVP2110]

Read on Twitter

?t=SEY4-iakB5GGdoUSBTlgXA&s=19

[MickeyDavis]

Read on Twitter

?t=SEY4-iakB5GGdoUSBTlgXA&s=19

Good, get extensions done now so there is no camp drama. Packers are good at taking care of their own.

[MickeyDavis]

Read on Twitter

[Matches Malone]

Hopefully an Elgton or tom extension.

[MickeyDavis]

Read on Twitter

[RRyder823]

Sucks to lose Jaire but even with a restructured incentive laden deal he very likely would have been gone next offseason anyways. So we trade one year of diminished superbowl hopes for better cap management and player development for the future.

The Packer way for perpetual bridesmaid status.

It takes two to get married, I don't think the groom (Jaire) was interested in staying in this relationship.

Anyways this is the age old debate we have every year, and especially at the end of Favre/Rodgers time here.[b) Is it better to mortgage the future for a better chance at a superbowl now[/b], or to maintain a balance where we're always in the playoff conversation but never truly go "all-in". The later of which has worked out pretty well for the Packers these last 30 or so years.

I can see both points of view tbh, so I don't fault people's stances either way.

Heres the thing at this point it isnt.

They dont need the cap space this year and the cap space made for next year would've been available by cutting him next offseason also. Injury prone or not it weakens the roster this season while not actually helping anymore then just cutting him next season

Unless they were worried about the locker room dynamic, plan on extending like every single upcoming FA this offseason or theres a Hendrickson type move incomming, ill still argue this makes little sense at this point

Edit: OK I just saw there taking the entire hit this year. Didn't know they could actually not do a post June 1st cut with it actually being post June 1st (seriously anyone else know that was a thing? lol)



Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

[MVP2110]

Read on Twitter

?t=MUo2lFhIpgOnvEr_umdFcA&s=19

[nagawicka]

I'm confident in our starters at CB. Nixon/Hobbs/Valentine with Bullard in the slot is a solid top 4. But after that it gets real iffy. And CBs get hurt often. Hoping we don't have to rely on Micah Robinson or Kalen King too much this year

Fans routinely underestimate the CB room the last few years. Packers though know who Valentine and Ballentine are/were and what they can/could do. They got Hobbs b/c they knew they had one solid CB spot to fill. A real postseason-run-worthy player, not just 'a' starter. I didn't expect a whole lot from Nixon either but fans seem(ed) to think he's just a camp body who tried hard. So now though they're concerned, so concerned, about that 4th CB spot, 'We're thin there!' Somehow Robinson, Hadden, King, and 4 UDFAs (some intriguing)--brought in, in standard Packers MO--aren't considered actual living football players until fans *are told* they are in fact *good*.

One, at least one, of those 7 or so prospects will outdo their (unexpectedly reassuring) scouting report, show up enough to impress coaches, and when it all shakes out we'll all be keeping an eye on the next donald driver or sam shields @CB4. You just don't know at this stage. By mid-season a real prospect would be rounding into a real feel for his role, but not seeing the field in super critical situations. Don't get it wrong: that guy could rise, fall, or sign elsewhere at potentially any level (Rochell, Ballentine, Hyde), but hey, no expectation = no disappointment. Look, nobody enjoyed the Rudy Ford J Owens epoch, so Gute smashed our options at Safety. Carping about thinness at CB4 indulges in First World Problems basically just b/c no one came to Green Bay and took individual fans by the hand to say: Gutey brought in 7 guys, 3 of 'em draft picks, rest easy, they good. We've seen that this works AND *conversely*, we've seen fans believing the hype--that so-&-so _must be good_ b/c they were told that Antuan Edwards and Ahmad Carroll and Damarious Randall were--that doesn't work. You gotta sift through a lotta prospects to find the tramon williamses and sam shields, so enjoy the most fun part.

[nagawicka]

Read on Twitter

?t=4H8L2Pdhp6TRQXoBIJemRA&s=19

Made what up. 'Reports' without sources that don't result in articles aren't really a valid storyline. Nobody's going on the record, the storyline is standard and not out of the ordinary in any way. When they can't come up with a real story then, they don't really have one now. Note well there's never a retraction or course correction when these media outlets aren't proven accurate on these unsourced stories after the fact. That's why they're not really "articles." Rasheed out, Dillon in, Doubs unhappy, TRADING FOR Adams or Metcalf when the Packers never made a call--STILL a lotta openly non-factual claims circulating among veteran Packer writers, still being repeated long after proven false. Thing is: both franchises and any players involved aren't talking while conducting their business, and that means there isn't a story until real sources prove there is.