Three Developing Headlines From the Packers Preseason Opener

This article will discuss three developing headlines to keep an eye on as the preseason progresses.  

After eight long months without football, The Packers returned to Lambeau Field on Thursday night to make their preseason debut against the Tennessee Titans. It was certainly a welcomed sight to see the players get after it and try to establish themselves in their first game action of the season. It is hard to make a lot of just one preseason game but there were certainly a lot of players who left a good first impression from their week one performances. These performances will set the stage for the final month of preparations leading into the week 1 showdown against the Bears and will help determine the Packers 53 man roster for that game.

I believe that these three headlines will be interesting to keep an eye on throughout the rest of the preseason.  

1. Marquez Valdes Scantling, Equanimeous St. Brown, and Jake Kumerow All Shine in their Packers Debut:

Marquez Valdes Scantling, Equanimeous St. Brown, and Jake Kumerow certainly shined in their first Packer performances showing off their route running, hands, and athletic ability.  All three receivers have shown that they have the potential to be a reliable target for Aaron Rodgers as the season progresses.  It will be interesting to see how the hierarchy among the young receivers progresses as the preseason moves on.

2. The Backup Quarterback Battle is Sure to be an Interesting One:

Brett Hundley, DeShone Kizer, and Tim Boyle all lead the Packers to touchdown drives and were successfully able to move the ball downfield in their preseason debuts.  With the competition heating up, there is little doubt that Brett Hundley will have to play the best football of his career over the next four weeks to retain his spot on the 53 man roster.  Many are down on Hundley because of his inconsistent play in his nine starts last season.  During the offseason, the Packers acquired DeShone Kizer to add depth to the roster and challenge Hundley for the backup job.  Kizer brings an extra dimension of mobility and athleticism to the position and showed that he can make plays on the run.  

Tim Boyle showed promise against third-team players who are battling for final roster spots so it will be interesting to see if he will be able to earn any second-team reps in practice or in any of the remaining preseason games.  Boyle could be a practice squad option for the Packers down the road if he is able to clear waivers, which will make the real quarterback battle, in all likelihood, between Brett Hundley and DeShone Kizer.

3. Khalil Mack, NaVorro Bowman, and Eric Reid Would Make the Packers an Instant Super Bowl Contender

The Packers defense had its high points and low points during the preseason opener but showed the ability to make adjustments when needed.  They were able to stabilize the game after giving up ten points in the first eighteen minutes and did not allow another score until the end of the fourth quarter when the outcome of the game was already in hand.

Although the Packers defense looked satisfactory in its first performance, it is still apparent that they could really use another impact player to legitimize the unit.  With Khalil Mack, NaVorro Bowman, and Eric Reid available, it is imperative that the Packers try to acquire some combination of the trio to help strengthen the defense.  

The last ten days have been a challenge for the safety position to remain intact as we have seen injuries occur to the likes of Kentrell Brice and Josh Jones.  With the depth of the safety position still largely unproven, bringing in Reid makes sense to both fortify and legitimize the position.  

The acquisition of Bowman would help fill the void left by Jake Ryan and would provide veteran leadership, stability to the linebacking core, and a tenacious defender who can stop the run and rush the passer.  

Finally, addressing the Khalil Mack trade speculation is very simple; if he is, in fact, available the Packers should do all that they can to acquire him.  While I understand that making a move like this is not in the Packers nature, it is very important to be able to adapt when a situation presents itself where it seems like certain factors are aligning in your favor to acquire a generational talent such as Mack.  

It will be interesting to see if the Packers defense is able to develop enough and stay healthy enough where outside help will not be needed as the season approaches.

Those are my early developing headlines, now the only thing to do is to let the 53 man roster debate commence!                

   

 

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

David Michalski is a staff writer for Cheesehead TV. He can be found on Twitter @kilbas27dave 

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (84)

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

August 11, 2018 at 12:15 pm

I'm on board with Mack as long as the Packers don't have to give up both #1s to get him. I don't see Bowman as an upgarde, since he's not the sideline to sideline guy he used to be. IMHO, Ried would provide the best bang for the buck for the Packer's defense. That would be my focus if I'm Gutsey, but also the issue with the National Anthem is probably why he hasn't signed yet....

0 points
0
0
TheVOR's picture

August 12, 2018 at 10:56 am

I just have to keep shaking my head at the number of Packers fan who can't see the simple math behind why we can't do most, or even any of this, if GB truly intends to sign Aaron Rodgers.

Now, if we want to say, screw it, Rodgers is under contract, let him play it out, then go into Franchise cycles, OK, maybe.

But truthfully for a team that apparently wants to do the right thing and extend the man, with this current roster and cap, maybe Reid and Bowman would be feasible on 1 year deals.

Finally, the further they get in preseason, the less likely any of it is that it happens, gets need time in systems, and reps for younger players are at a premium. I just don't see any of it happening. Also, Reid has been concussed multiple times already, just saying..

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

August 12, 2018 at 12:15 pm

"Also, Reid has been concussed multiple times already, just saying.."

It's unlikely that you're going to find many players who haven't anymore, whether they've been reported or not.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

August 12, 2018 at 06:16 am

I believe he's already come out and said there wouldn't be any protests during the National Anthem with whichever new teams wants to sign him. You have to believe he'll come fairly cheap and would instantly help the Packers defense.

Edit..Oops...Just read another story that said he "Take a different approach".

Hmmmmm...

0 points
0
0
Ligaya Barlow's picture

August 12, 2018 at 06:36 am

Who really gives a crap about the anthem.

For stars ever tumble
But stripes never fade
In the land of the fleeced
And home of the blade

BurmaShave! (lol)

0 points
0
0
GBPDAN1's picture

August 12, 2018 at 09:22 am

Handsback....... signing Bowman would help replace Jake Ryan and Ryan's skill set, which is a run thumper in the middle. Bowman's sideline to sideline speed used to be elite, but now he's on par with Ryan as Ryan is not a speedster. We would use Bowman on some run downs to help against muscle running teams. Martinez, and especially Burks, are our sideline to sideline guys.

I think Ried would be a good pickup to solidify depth ( or supplant Brice) at safety. We could get Bowman and Ried relatively cheap, probably around 7-9M for both.

Mack is asking for 22M a year with a boat load guaranteed. Curious to see how this all works out.....or, doesn't work out....

0 points
0
0
The TKstinator's picture

August 11, 2018 at 12:16 pm

But
Many of the defensive players for much of the game are rotational or reserves, not GB’s “main” guys, so the OVERALL defensive performance is hard to judge. I’m sure the coaches got some valuable info on many of the “depth” players, however.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

August 11, 2018 at 02:32 pm

Yep. I think Bowman, who is really a base ILB only at this stage, doesn't generate much value. They can do what he does with CMIII on run-downs and put Gilbert out on the edge and probably come out ahead (i.e. CMIII at ILB + Gilbert on edge on run downs > Bowman at ILB + CMIII on edge).

If either of the safeties who got hurt against Tennessee (Jones/Whitehead) are going to miss time, Reid makes sense. Brice played. Knowing how cautious the Packers are with injured players, he's fine. But they could be getting thin at S. I've been pulling for a S signing since OTAs. Reid immediately makes this team better.

Mack is the real wild card. Putting Mack and Reid on this defense makes a huge difference...likely gives the Packers a defense in the top 12 or so as they get comfortable in the scheme. If he were a FA, then I'd be all over this. But having to part with the picks it would take to pry him away from Oakland AND sign him long term? I think it's just too steep...and there's no way Oakland takes on Perry's contract.

0 points
0
0
The TKstinator's picture

August 11, 2018 at 03:05 pm

Agreed.
When it comes to Bowman, Reid, and really any other player with “name recognition”, I have to assume GB’s pro personnel dept knows just a bit more than I do about what ability they still have left vs. the $ it would require to bring them in, and also compared to the “no name” players already in camp.
(Maybe I’m still under the TT influence in which almost ANY FA is just “not a good value.”)

0 points
0
0
GBPDAN1's picture

August 11, 2018 at 03:11 pm

I agree, The TK

This statement was mentioned in this article;

"Although the Packers defense looked satisfactory in its first performance, it is still apparent that they could really use another impact player to legitimize the unit "

It's hard to judge a Defense when it's missing most of it's play makers as the Packers were against Tennessee.... Daniels, Perry , Mathews, Wilkinson, King, Williams, Alexander, etc. , all not playing

I'm not saying not to pick up one of the mentioned players in this article, but let's also wait and see what we have. Plus, Pettine wasn't playing his full scheme against the Titans. He played very vanilla D.

0 points
0
0
NWPackersfan's picture

August 11, 2018 at 12:31 pm

You know what i remember is that the last time we traded for a Raiders player we won a Super Bowl...can you say Charles Woodson!!!!

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

August 11, 2018 at 12:43 pm

If Charles Woodson was only a pair of dice...I'd own Las Vegas by the mere sounding aloud of his name on every roll.

0 points
0
0
The TKstinator's picture

August 11, 2018 at 01:25 pm

Wasn’t he a free agent?

0 points
0
0
Lare's picture

August 11, 2018 at 01:32 pm

Yes.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

August 11, 2018 at 06:24 pm

Everyone thought he was on the decline too so TT got him at a discount. Nobody thinks Mack is on the decline. So it's totally a different scenario.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

August 11, 2018 at 10:03 pm

We signed Charles Woodson in 2007 and won the SB in 2010, 4 seasons later. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

August 12, 2018 at 05:22 am

Packersd did not trade for Charles Woodson!

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

August 11, 2018 at 12:35 pm

If the goal for the next or last 4-5 years of having Rodgers is a one time SB chance for number two, then by all means go all in with draft picks etc to get Mack. But doing so, will put the Packers back in the same sinking boat, as to replacing/developing talent, that has hindered them for years now... defense being the utmost offender.

Some will say the 1st rd selections are late rd positions, but they have strong trade value in the draft.

Mack has been referenced as a Reggie White-esk signing but it still took 4 years to get to the SB with White and Mack certainly doesn't appear to have the 'team' and winning at the top of his priority list in my opinion. Can Mack carry this defense, ask Oakland.

Going all in for Mack leaves no room for failure, no excuses to not be in the SB or to lose it. This is a big decision and one IMO that cannot be made unless Mack is signed to a long term deal and not just a one season rental especially with the next 4-5 years of Rodgers resting on it.

0 points
0
0
Kb999's picture

August 11, 2018 at 01:31 pm

if you don't make a move for Mack or Bowman , your offense is going to have to put up a hell of a lot points every week to win. Not trying would be failing. As for Hundly, I don't trust him at QB. Package him in a trade. Let him be the backup on another team.

0 points
0
0
The TKstinator's picture

August 11, 2018 at 03:43 pm

How good is Bowman at this point?

0 points
0
0
Kb999's picture

August 11, 2018 at 03:54 pm

How good is Clay at this point??

0 points
0
0
The TKstinator's picture

August 11, 2018 at 04:54 pm

I’d say “not great”. But Bowman is not (and never was) a pass rusher.

0 points
0
0
Lare's picture

August 11, 2018 at 01:36 pm

If the Packers don't re-sign Cobb and Matthews next season they have about what it would take to pay Mack. Would be nice if they could also get out from underneath Perry's contract in the deal.

0 points
0
0
johngalt's picture

August 11, 2018 at 01:35 pm

Taryn- great points. I'll ask you this- if the Packers stay relatively healthy (thinking premier positions) and still don't win a sb or God forbid don't make it- what'll be narrative then? Gutey has said he'll explore any way to make this team better. Frustration oozes off of 12 at this point because the talent has been lacking. I get that this is a draft/develop team. But that mentality preserves being "competitive" in the future. This team needs to lean into it, and nut up to get some proven talent. Yea Mack could get hurt, but so could AR. Risk a lot to earn a lot. TT hamstrung this team. I do understand your angle tho

0 points
0
0
Kb999's picture

August 11, 2018 at 01:39 pm

The talent has just gotten older. The veteran players are declining.

0 points
0
0
porupack's picture

August 11, 2018 at 01:41 pm

Disagree with your theory that a FA vet will make GB a SB contender, and particularly opposed to KMack. KMack is just bright lights, fantasy football. Ok on EReid.
The prosecution submits against KMack;

Case #1: They already are superbowl contenders (top 3 in NFC), certainly after the big upgrades in coaching/coordination. Certainly after a very promising draft. Certainly after a big return of key MIA 2017 draftees that weren't available last year. There is likely to be an across board influx of 25+
%, and mostly upgrades to the roster.
Extraordinary off season. One more strong offseason, and GB will have mastered a turnaround with very few weaknesses.

Case#2:
No team can buy, or stack a SB team. Too many variables. Best to build a strong team, and be contenders for multiple years, than bet on one. I'll bet against odds on a stacked team. (Patriot's 16-0 season v Giants). Hmmm.

Case #3
What did the big signings of NSuh, Haynesworth, Ndamndi Asomugha (just to name a few) indicate about risks in buying 'proven' talent? Does a dominant player guarantee that success transfers to a new system, or is the system a large part of that player's success.

Case#4; while all draftees are a risk, including high rounds, a GM hedges by gaining the odds. More picks, the better the chances of a big hit and you get 5 years of modest cost for that.
So the price of KMack, negates your bet scoring above a mere 33% odds on a first rounder. Alternatively you would put all your stock in one player. (asking price was suggested at three #1 picks (2 in 2018 and 1 in 2019). Terrible bet.

Case #5: [red alert!] Reneging on a signed contract = trouble ahead. Skipping camp. Hmmm. Distraction? Ego? Drama? How might MDaniels, KClark, MWilkerson consider their next moves, seeing this high ransom. It would build a lot of good camaraderie and team first sacrifice all over, wouldn't it?? It wouldl feel great for MDaniels working dog, rise to the top, only to see the fan-throb go to this shiney boy.

Case #6; Mortgage your future? KMack is seeking $20 -23 million per year with guarantees. Go buy 2-3 other impact players for that money if needed to fill other holes on Oline, safety.

Case #7; Injury. Any player has high work-hazards and thus why teams build depth. Too much money for one guy is rolling high risk.

Case#8; High quality teams win superbowls by smart coaching, execution, unit cohesion more than all-star dream teams. We have many reasons to be optimistic that we have elevated the coaching and management considerably. Trust in this development, and see before concluding we just need another big FA.

This is all fan fantasy, I'm pretty certain packers management and coaches are not entertaining a KMack at all.

EReid, sure. No cost in draft picks. Cut before the season if he isn't an upgrade.

0 points
0
0
Kb999's picture

August 11, 2018 at 01:47 pm

Case 1. If smart coaches don't have players they watch the playoffs on tv.

0 points
0
0
lucky953's picture

August 11, 2018 at 02:54 pm

Green Bay’s staff clearly does not share fans’/writers panic about the edge position. It’s been perplexing. I was encouraged by Reggie Gilbert’s performance. Biegel, Odom- not so much. My hope is the interior pass rush is strong enough that teams won’t be able to double on the edge and that those guys can do just enough to be disruptive. Saw a little of that against Tennessee

0 points
0
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

August 11, 2018 at 06:08 pm

I like who we have!

Develop them and get them experience. Get them to function well together with cohesiveness.

What is with all these people screaming we need this guy or that guy? Let's not mortgage our future and let's keep a cohesive team together. Do not get rid of our 2 first round picks next year. Wow!

0 points
0
0
Lare's picture

August 11, 2018 at 06:13 pm

I'm sure Ted would agree with you 100%.

0 points
0
0
johngalt's picture

August 11, 2018 at 06:26 pm

No ones screaming. Just swapping ideas. Nice when things stay civil- even if we don't see things the same

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

August 12, 2018 at 06:11 am

I generally agree. I'd say there are 7 super bowl contenders in the NFC (Eagles, Rams, Falcons, Vikings, GB, Carolina, and NO). I do think our draft class is promising, and that we can expect the 2017 draft class to improve and play more snaps. If I didn't think we were close, there wouldn't be any point to going all in on Khalil Mack. If I thought we were top 3, I wouldn't touch Mack. But I'd put us around 5th, so he's worth analyzing anyway.

Case #2: if you've got a base of young and good players, I think a team can buy their way to greatness. I think Denver did just that, and Seattle came mighty close. The caveat is that other than Clark, and to a lesser degree, Martinez, all of our good players who have shown it in the NFL are on 2nd contracts. Our top 10 contracts are already top-heavy. That makes bringing in a huge money FA very, very difficult.

#3: Buying high-priced FAs is always a risk. Some do work out. As for concerns about Mack not doing well in a new system, Pettine won't screw him up. Hell, even Capers couldn't wreck Mack's game.

#4: Generally true. I have no idea about 33%, particularly if you're talking about a stud pass-rushing OLB. Three firsts is MSRP. I don't think Oakland will get anything like that - but who knows?

#5: Character really matters when one is talking about these kinds of dollars. See Haynesworth. However, I think "holding out" is an unfair pejorative. I view what Mack is doing as an efficient breach. Mack wouldn't be in this situation if the veteran players hadn't sold rookies down the river. I view Julio Jones' mini-hold out much more dimly since he voluntarily signed a top-of-the-market (at the time) contract. Mack signed a contract that he had little choice but to sign. A team (much less a player) isn't even allowed to negotiate about the fifth year option or its terms: it is absolutely mandatory.

#6, #7, #8: I agree.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

August 12, 2018 at 06:45 am

A lot of great thoughtful facts and discussion. The Mack signing has been glossed over and over already, pipe dream IMO, the cap simply doesn't allow it with a quarterback like AR. The Dolphins gave Suh big bucks and it didn't workout. The Bills gave Mario Williams big bucks. it didn't work. These players were at the top of their game at the time of the signings. Thanks porupack and TGR.

0 points
0
0
Barnacle's picture

August 12, 2018 at 10:27 am

Case 8.......”smart coaching”? Too late for this year, we still have MM.

0 points
0
0
PatrickGB's picture

August 11, 2018 at 01:48 pm

Well said. In addition, my thinking is that if we really were interested in acquiring an outside veteran, the team would have done so by now. Some of the names mentioned would be nice to have but not imperative.

0 points
0
0
TJ Coon's picture

August 11, 2018 at 01:46 pm

2 late first rounders is a no brainer for Mack. Green Bay hasn't had a special player like this since Reggie.

0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

August 11, 2018 at 02:55 pm

May not be necessary. 1st and 2nd might be enough.

0 points
0
0
Jonathan Spader's picture

August 11, 2018 at 03:28 pm

What about CM3 the Packers all time sack leader? Prior to his hamstring injuries he was a disruptive force.

0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

August 12, 2018 at 06:26 am

Noooooooo. Couldn’t disagree more. That, in addition to contract, would be an exorbitant price. If it were Rodgers last year it would still be a baseball-like sell out of the following four years or so.

Moreover, at a position where two rookies looked very promising: Burks and Thomas. Not a no brainer by any means.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

August 12, 2018 at 06:57 am

The Pack has 2 1st round picks next year. The pick aquired from N.O. will most likely be very late, likely between 26th or higher. Assuming the Packers have a really good season, their pick in the 1st round should around the same. The Raiders would be better off dealing Mack to a bad team and getting higher 1st round talent.

0 points
0
0
korbie33's picture

August 11, 2018 at 02:10 pm

I think trading for the Raiders Mack would provide the same result as when they traded for Reggie White. Plus they receive a great player at the beginning of his career. DO IT NOW.

0 points
0
0
BELIEVER's picture

August 11, 2018 at 02:48 pm

Traded for #82, go back and do your homework.

0 points
0
0
The TKstinator's picture

August 11, 2018 at 03:46 pm

Wasn’t Reggie White, #92, a free agent?
And didn’t he receive a divine phone call telling him to sign with GB?

0 points
0
0
porupack's picture

August 11, 2018 at 03:47 pm

Let's get Odell Beckham, Dee Ford, and Earl Thomas as well, and see if AJ green would like to join the all star team. That would definitely guarantee a SB win. Give em all our draft picks for next 2 years cuz they'll be happy to unload the contracts. Restructure everyone, so they're affordable till 2020 draft. Good idea, just...let's go all in.

0 points
0
0
The TKstinator's picture

August 11, 2018 at 04:55 pm

WooHoo!
Now we rolling!!!

0 points
0
0
Rebecca's picture

August 12, 2018 at 07:36 pm

Ha! Good one! :)

0 points
0
0
Lare's picture

August 11, 2018 at 05:45 pm

That's what Ted would do.

0 points
0
0
johngalt's picture

August 11, 2018 at 02:14 pm

Duplicate

0 points
0
0
johngalt's picture

August 11, 2018 at 02:13 pm

Porupack- you came prepared. All your cases are built on real world observations- no doubt exemplified by the Packers the last 7 or 8 yrs. I'll admit that the Reid signing is a lot lower risk than Mack. I just think that GB needed a shot of juice when Reggie came, and also when Charles came. Timing is everything, and so is effort. If Gutey is gonna play TT's cards- what was the point of the change at GM? TT is the missionary position of GM's. Howz that worked for GB since 2011? Add some FA talent on D- blaze your own path is all I'm saying-

0 points
0
0
Jonathan Spader's picture

August 11, 2018 at 03:30 pm

Gute has added FA talent. What do you call Wilkerson, Grahan, Lewis & Williams?

0 points
0
0
johngalt's picture

August 11, 2018 at 03:36 pm

Agree- they've added some FA's. Add to what they've added (D) is what I'm saying.

0 points
0
0
porupack's picture

August 11, 2018 at 03:54 pm

Jgalt;
In principle, I'm happy with adding FA. But once you have the double impact of: high dollar contract at the players absolute premium valuation, you better be sure that is your final piece. So far, I might go along.
But....once you take that big gamble (and as I said, it could be legit), you add the trade price of three #1 picks? Those two are combined are huge, and you still have quite a few risks as I tried to say; injuries to your high stakes guy, other injuries, real games won/lost. Even a stacked team has about 15% odds? That is poor gambling IMO.
Otherwise in fantasy football, sure sign a bunch of guys and give up a bunch of picks and cross your fingers on your 15% chance.

0 points
0
0
Ligaya Barlow's picture

August 12, 2018 at 06:45 am

("TT is the missionary position of GMs" haha. Good one. )

0 points
0
0
mamasboy's picture

August 11, 2018 at 03:57 pm

Mack wants $22,000.000 a year. I was going to say that's too much, but isn't Clay making about 14 mil this year? That doesn't seem too demanding, when you think about that way.

0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

August 12, 2018 at 06:28 am

Are you arguing to cut Clay for Mack? They are not the same type of player.

0 points
0
0
PackerfanAuggie15's picture

August 11, 2018 at 04:22 pm

3 first round picks, thats pure lunacy. Great defenses are not made or broken by a star player, they require good to very good play at many levels. 3 first round

0 points
0
0
johngalt's picture

August 11, 2018 at 04:25 pm

Great points all around.

Knowns: pass rush is largely a work in progress, w/ Clay likely moving inside for a lot more snaps, Biegel ?, Perry our best, and Gilbert coming on strong. We're also hoping the inside rush negates our soft outside rush- No one hopes so more than me.

Rodgers has had to play out of his mind to scratch, claw, and carry this team to most of its success. I'd love to see them stop leaning on him like a rented mule, and build a top 10 Defense. I do think Pettine is a stud, and GB has made some great moves. I'm not sure if this team can go deep in the playoffs just yet w/o putting up 30+ points a game. Expectations in check, hopes sky high. How bout a G-Mo trade to keep this rolling?

0 points
0
0
PackerfanAuggie15's picture

August 11, 2018 at 04:25 pm

Continued... picks and 20 + mil. would fill of holes. Spending that on one player just creates deficits at other positions.

0 points
0
0
Cartwright's picture

August 11, 2018 at 06:14 pm

Not for nothing, although we won the game and only allowed 10 and then a late meaningless TD the defense at times looked like last year especially when they cut to the booth and I saw Pettine up there. He reminded me of Capers but with a bigger nose, then we began getting gashed on a big yardage plays.

After a few more games if no one stands out and the drop off after Clay and Nick seems substantial and the safety situation is still iffy with Whitehead and Brice hurt, I could see a move being made and Reid would seem like the likeliest candidate. He wouldn't cost anything to get and he'll come at a bargain. But it would be nice if we can swing for the fences and land both.

Quentin Rollins, Vince Beigle, Kyler Fackrel, Trevor Davis, DeAngelo Yancy, a late round pick and some cash for big Mack and we'll even throw in Cole Madison. My dream trade.

0 points
0
0
Bert's picture

August 11, 2018 at 06:40 pm

I can see both sides of trading for Mack. But given ARs age our window is narrowing. Fact is we may have to sacrifice the future and make hay while the sun shines. It really may be time to bring on an impact player on defense (i.e. Mack) and go for broke. All the draft picks in the world aren't gonna mean much if Aaron declines in the next 2-3 years.

0 points
0
0
Graham Mattison's picture

August 12, 2018 at 01:59 am

The Green Bay defense is already solid against the run, but adding Bowman would make it filthy. And that type of dominance against the run may be necessary to slow down the Vikings offense - if you have faith that the secondary has improved substantially.

If not, I would say that signing Bowman and bringing in Eric Reid to solidify the safety spot would be the most likely and best case scenario.

Mack's new contract demands would be too onerous under the current hard salary cap - that's why the Raiders haven't already signed him to a long term deal. Mack isn't going to happen unless he's willing to take less money than he's asking from Oakland and would actually want to spend his winters in tropical Lambeau for the foreseeable future. The talent justifies the pay he's demanding - but how do you pay anyone else? - Especially with the ludicrous contract we already signed Nick Perry to... for as yet unexplained reasons... that is going to absolutely kill our cap space for the foreseeable future. Who wants to take on Perry's contract in a trade?

Anybody? Anyone?? Buehler???

Bowman may be a liability in the passing game (Wait, Clay isn't?) but he's a beast against the run. (Clay isn't.)

As for Reid, he shouldn't even be available right now - period. The fact that he is - and we still aren't talking to him - IS INSANE.

UNLESS you think we could get Seattle to trade Earl Thomas to us - (not happening) and we could get him to play on his current contract (also not happening) - Reid is the next best "available" option - and better than the guys we currently expect to start.

Assuming the Packers don't try to sign either Bowman or Reid, and they find work elsewhere prior to Week 1...

When the annual injury bug inevitably hits the Packers secondary this year - I'm betting the odds on Quinten Rollins getting called back, (after they cut him) to play safety or linebacker around week 13, are looking pretty darn good.

SMH.

0 points
0
0
Kb999's picture

August 12, 2018 at 09:48 am

Bowman will fill the void when the injury bug really hits. Clay and the rest of the defense hadn't played a full season since highschool. Negotiate a deal for Mack. This type player dosnt come around that often. He could replace some senior citizens on the D getting paid big bucks. The time is now. How many more great years does Arod have left

0 points
0
0
PAPackerbacker's picture

August 12, 2018 at 03:25 am

Brett Hundley had 3 years to develop and Kiser and Boyle both played just as well or better than he did. It's time to move on with other prospects for a quality backup. Hundley is just not getting it done. With 3 years into the system I would have expected him to shine over Kiser and Boyle, yet he did not. I thought Boyle was the best of the 3 QB's in the first contest, but there are 3 more games to go before the regular season begins. As for Kumerow, MVS, and ESB, they all have proven they are worthy of a roster spot. But again, it was just one game. And Mack would be to costly and Reid is a distraction. Bowman, not so sure about him. The Packers had an excellent draft and FA additions and have great new coaches. Give the system a chance to work.

0 points
0
0
Mercuryrising13's picture

August 12, 2018 at 06:36 am

Everyone can agree how talented Mack is, a generational talent. And it can be said that another generational talent, White, enabled us to win the SB. However, that was a different team at a different time and was more solidified at all positions. Offensively, barring injuries, we’re as good as anyone. Defensively, I believe it can be argued that one great player can not make up for what we are lacking. To give up so much equity for 1 player when 2 or 3 number 1 draft picks can change the dynamic of our team for years to come. Factor into this the high dollar cost to pay Mack, it could be our undoing. I would like to see us acquire Bowman, still a menace, (and maybe a veteran DB) and see what these less pricey acquisitions could have on us this year. Go Pack.

0 points
0
0
fthisJack's picture

August 12, 2018 at 08:46 am

you guys that are clamoring for Mack are the guys that would go out and buy a 70000 truck if you got a $3000 bonus at work not caring that your job security isn't all that great.
its INSANE to give up our 2 #1 draft picks or more and then pay this guy 22 mil a year???? really??? really???

0 points
0
0
Maddygirl1's picture

August 12, 2018 at 08:56 am

I think I'd for sure bring in Ried (if he agrees to not being a distraction and to focus 100% only on football and winning a SB). Most bang for buck. Should be cheap and a HUGE talent upgade over Brice. Talking pro-bowl level talent people!

I'd also be in favor of trading 2 first round picks for K Mack. I'd start negotiations with a first and a third. Then work up to 2 firsts if needed, but stop there. I'd maybe consider a first rounder and a wide reciever if they are interested (ie. Cobb, Alison, Yancey, Trevor Davis) to make room for a few of our 4 new young promising recievers (I don't want any to get away).

I'd love to also get Bowman for obvious running downs.

0 points
0
0
DD's picture

August 12, 2018 at 09:25 am

Watched the vikes at Broncos. Vikes look more polished on defense even with rookies. Offense looked very sharp. Difference I say, MM and Zimmerman!! Simple, but true.

0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

August 12, 2018 at 10:31 am

Forget Mack he wants over 20 million per season , I rather have Bowman and Reid , and keep all our next year draft picks.

0 points
0
0
Kb999's picture

August 12, 2018 at 11:09 am

Draft pics. How did Vince Young, Jamarkus Russell, Matt Lihnert, etc. Work out. Crap shoot. Mack is a beast with a resume. Let's see if Brian G can make it happen at a reasonable price.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

August 12, 2018 at 12:17 pm

You can make just as many cases for draft picks who do pan out, though, too. Yes...a crap shoot. I'm surprised that more people who have been singing BG's praises as a drafter haven't commented on the fact that they'd rather take their chances with the extra picks and his eye. But you're right: those are cheap players with team control and a chance to pan out rather than paying out your present and future for a guy like Mack.

Could he buy the Packers an SB? Maybe.
Could he be just good enough to tease us further? Maybe.
Could he be a fat cat that spirals this team even deeper into a rebuild and ends any chance of #12 getting another ring? Maybe.

0 points
0
0
Kb999's picture

August 12, 2018 at 12:58 pm

I don't have a Crystal ball, barring injuries, he will transform this D and take it to another level. you gotta try

0 points
0
0
Mercuryrising13's picture

August 12, 2018 at 05:27 pm

I do not have a crystal ball either, nor am I Nostradamus. However, I agree with you that Mack is a unique talent. I also agree that not all draft picks pan out. That being said, it intrigues me the draft possibilities that exist. I like the idea of trying to package a combination of our picks to move up into the top 10. Players chosen in the top 10 rarely, if ever, fail to perform and most at a very high level. Failure to move into the top 10 still provides us with 2 strong possibilities next year of improving our team. As I stated previously, that’s quite a sum of money to be gambling on Mack doing for us what the Minister of Defense did.

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

August 13, 2018 at 08:22 am

I don't know that I would categorize top 10 picks as "rarely, if ever, (failing) to perform... at a very high level."

Granted, because they are the pick of the litter, they - theoretically - should have a better chance than any other selections, but I checked out 2013's top ten picks just to see how they've faired.

I picked 2013 because that allows for seeing if the teams that drafted them picked up their 5th year option (2017), and it also lets us see what kind of new deal they got if they didn't get resigned/extended by 2017.

Out of the top 10, I would argue that 7 of 10 did not "live up to their draft status", did not perform at a high level, or haven't stuck. Granted, some is due to injury and.or circumstances. I will let you decide, but these are the players who have ended up as backups, marginal starters, character/suspension risks, bounced around the league / traded for low round picks, or, in some cases, out of the league:

Luke Joeckel
Dion Jordan (most likely to salvage top career, in my opinion)
Barkevious Mingo
Jonathan Cooper
Tavon Austin
Dee Milliner
Chance Warmack

0 points
0
0
JohnnyLogan's picture

August 12, 2018 at 11:10 am

Love the coaching changes but this D, outside the D line, is still short of talent. Relying on rookie CB's and an aging Tramon, a pass rush predicated on Mathews, Perry, Gilbert, Fack, and Biegel, and a 3rd rd rookie to cover the middle just doesn't inspire. There aren't enough "stars" there to think we can stop the big offenses of NO, Atlanta, Philly... If Mack can be had for a reasonable price I'd be in favor. I'd sign Reid tomorrow distraction or no. Rodgers has already come out supporting the right to protest so Reid would have a sympathetic partner in the best player on the team. I don't like the protests but they're the new reality until someone comes up with a way to alleviate the situation. Sign Mack if the price is reasonable. Sign Reid tomorrow.

0 points
0
0
Cubbygold's picture

August 12, 2018 at 08:55 pm

Mack wants 22M. That reasonable?

0 points
0
0
Kb999's picture

August 12, 2018 at 09:37 pm

What you want and what you eventually get are 2 different things. The NFL is a business. He 's got the resume to ask for ridiculous money, dosn 't mean he's going to get it. The market will decide what he's worth. Green Bay needs to be in the conversation.

0 points
0
0
DD's picture

August 12, 2018 at 03:05 pm

I dont like the developmental word always used with the Packers!

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

August 13, 2018 at 06:54 am

Get over it. It is a necessity with the salary cap and the CBA.

You can pay about $3 mil per player on the roster. You need about 7 rookie contracts to make the Rodgers deal hit the average. Then you add in the others like Matthews, Cobb, Perry, Bulaga, Bakh, Adams, Linsley, Daniels, Graham, etc. Pretty soon you're up to needing 30+ rookie contract players. Some of them will have to make a big contribution.

Player development is a required piece of being a contender.

0 points
0
0
DD's picture

August 12, 2018 at 03:07 pm

Other teams don't develop as much as the Packers. They plug and play at a high level. Not with MM.

0 points
0
0
Cubbygold's picture

August 12, 2018 at 08:54 pm

If GB wants an elite pass rusher, wait till next year and trade up into the top 5. Grab a guy like bosa and let him make an impact on a rookie deal. Let clay walk and use that 14M to add another impact player where needed

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

August 13, 2018 at 03:15 am

Is there any, even slightest sign that Oakland will be willing to trade Mack?

Pure dreams my fellow Pack fans, pure dreams....

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

August 13, 2018 at 06:27 am

The Packers are already Super Bowl contenders as their roster stands today. They don't need to trade for anyone or sign anyone to reach that level.

Of the 3 guys mentioned as "adds" to enhance that status, only Mack moves the needle significantly.

0 points
0
0
LambeauPlain's picture

August 13, 2018 at 08:55 am

The D played complete vanilla, per MM's and Pettine's stated objectives, sat 7 of 11 starters and still did well against a playoff caliber offense after adjusting following the first drive.

I expect the D to be much improved this year with Pettine coaching the D and the talent on the Dline...made even better by Wilkerson and Adams ready to roll.

But if Gute could get Mack....oh man!

Reid, not so much. I think he could be another disrupter in the locker room the way Randall was.

Bowman would be a 2nd, even a 3rd stringer with Burks and Thomas showing up.

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

August 13, 2018 at 09:39 am

Eric Reid was a team captain. I don't think he was ever considered a locker room problem. I don't see any tangible evidence that there is cause for concern he'd bring anything similar to what Randall brought into the locker room / sideline.

0 points
0
0