Official Seahawks vs Packers smack thread

[Great Dayne]

We have a smack talk thread on our page and I would be surprised if you were banned in that thread. If you want to toss salt at us on our page, that is where it should be thrown.

I had another Hawk fan just say I'm not allowed to go onto their boards.

 

[chf]

Are you happy with no drafted starters on Defense in the last 4 years?

Have to be patient. Guys like Marsh and Clark and Reed are being rotated in. Nice problem to have. All of them have shown flashes of being really good starters. We'll see.

 

[SonnyCID]

Are you happy with no drafted starters on Defense in the last 4 years?

Umm, yeah. Most of the starters on the defense are established vets. Lol @ you acting like that's a bad thing.

 

[SonnyCID]

Concussions are a tough thing hard to know when that happens. If he would not have hit his head he would be starting. Are you suggesting the Packers should have cut him like they did when they got rid of over priced pro bowl guard Sitton and replaced him with depth and have not missed a beat still being one of the top O lines in the league.

I guess they could have cut Shields as without him when able to play and not hurt with Randall and Rollins and a healthy D they have been averaging about 17.5 points against on D which would be 3rd in the league.

Peppers is in the last of his 3 year contract and is not listed as a starter. He plays quite a few snaps a game and the idea was to limit snaps early in the season to keep him fresh for December football. That strategy has paid off as he played full time with Perry out with a few bones broke in his hand against Seattle and he had a good game and is ready for more.

I know you want to think that Peppers is just sitting on the bench getting paid for doing nothing but that is not the case

Who are you talking about, Matthews? Sorry, all three of GBs highest paid defenders are not starters.

 

[LambeauLegs]

Whe

So if our D is overpaid and aging, how do you describe GB's D?
For certain, GB's D is more expensive at not nearly as effective as Seattle's.
I'm pretty sure you have referenced our fan base as bandwaggoner's who know little about football, but jeeze man you look totally out of touch regarding your comments on the strength of Seattle's team.

Where did I say it was not a good defense. I said it is an aging one with many on their second contract with no young players that are starter quality being drafted in to replace them. As they get older they are not as effective which most of the stats show this year except the points against which you can keep low by playing your division teams twice. If Seattle cant get younger D players in during the next few years there will be a drop off in talent.

No D starters drafted in the last 4 years is not a good thing. As far as the Packer D with 7 starters being drafted in the last 4 years on their first contracts the starters are paid a reasonable amount. Once Peppers is done and Shields is done it changes dramatically. What you should do is add up the salaries of the starters who actually play and compare the teams. As when I said an aging over paid defense I was referring to starters

 

[LambeauLegs]

Umm, yeah. Most of the starters on the defense are established vets. Lol @ you acting like that's a bad thing.

well lets see how that works in the next 2 or 3 years

 

[SonnyCID]

Concussions are a tough thing hard to know when that happens. If he would not have hit his head he would be starting. Are you suggesting the Packers should have cut him like they did when they got rid of over priced pro bowl guard Sitton and replaced him with depth and have not missed a beat still being one of the top O lines in the league.

I guess they could have cut Shields as without him when able to play and not hurt with Randall and Rollins and a healthy D they have been averaging about 17.5 points against on D which would be 3rd in the league.

Peppers is in the last of his 3 year contract and is not listed as a starter. He plays quite a few snaps a game and the idea was to limit snaps early in the season to keep him fresh for December football. That strategy has paid off as he played full time with Perry out with a few bones broke in his hand against Seattle and he had a good game and is ready for more.

I know you want to think that Peppers is just sitting on the bench getting paid for doing nothing but that is not the case

If you're going to make the argument that rotational players should be respected, then how about all the young rotational players on Seattles defense? At least non of them are the 2nd highest paid players on their defense.

 

[LambeauLegs]

Who are you talking about, Matthews? Sorry, all three of GBs highest paid defenders are not starters.

Sam Shields an undrafted free agent starting corner back that was concussed in the first game and has not played since

 

[SonnyCID]

well lets see how that works in the next 2 or 3 years

Why wait? You're talking shit about it now as if they're already done.

 

[LambeauLegs]

If you're going to make the argument that rotational players should be respected, then how about all the young rotational players on Seattles defense? At least non of them are the 2nd highest paid players on their defense.

When younger drafted players are better than a veteran starter they should play instead of the veteran which Perry now is. Then you can limit snaps and save the older guy for later in the season.

The difference is Peppers is done and is off the books soon, the players on your D have several years left so no money is coming off the books with those core players

 

[LambeauLegs]

Why wait? You're talking shit about it now as if they're already done.

Get a link of where I said they are done? I said an aging over paid defense. That in no way says they are done. it does indicate though that the future though it may not be as easy to keep the defense as effective if newer younger players are not there to take their place.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

the players on your D have several years left so no money is coming off the books with those core players

Yeah got to love that the D is good to go for several years as is and they'll continue to bring players in to compete for those jobs regradless.

 

[SonnyCID]

When younger drafted players are better than a veteran starter they should play instead of the veteran which Perry now is. Then you can limit snaps and save the older guy for later in the season.

The difference is Peppers is done and is off the books soon, the players on your D have several years left so no money is coming off the books with those core players

Just stop. You obviously don't know what you're talking about. You're just desperate

 

[SonnyCID]

Get a link of where I said they are done? I said an aging over paid defense. That in no way says they are done. it does indicate though that the future though it may not be as easy to keep the defense as effective if newer younger players are not there to take their place.

Ok. So who's building a better defense RIGHT NOW? Who in 2-3 years will take advantage of Seahawks inevitable and steep decline?

 

[SonnyCID]

When younger drafted players are better than a veteran starter they should play instead of the veteran which Perry now is. Then you can limit snaps and save the older guy for later in the season.

The difference is Peppers is done and is off the books soon, the players on your D have several years left so no money is coming off the books with those core players

Here's another little piece of info, not just about the seahawks, but about the nfl in general....

For most players, pretty much of any position outside of QB, there is relatively little dead money in the last year or two of their contract. The Seahawks are an excellent example of this, so money can actually come off the books easily if the player underperforms. If he's not underperforming, then it's not a problem. Unless of course you want to impress morons with your "draft skills" by giving a younger - less proven player his play time just because you drafted him.

 

[SonnyCID]

Frank Clark would probably be the best defensive player on gbs defense this year.

 

[Great Dayne]

Frank Clark would probably be the best defensive player on gbs defense this year.

As much as I despise our defense I would say Perry until the recent injury and Morgan have been far superior.

 

[LambeauLegs]

Compare UDFA's, not just draft choices.
Now how does it look?

Ok had a chance to look and compare undrafted free agents that are currently on each of the teams keeping in the same time frame from 2013 through 2016.

2013

Seattle: 0 undrafted free agents

Packers: 1 undrafted free agent Lane Taylor who is now a starting left guard taking over for the pro bowl guard Josh Sitton who was cut. SO yes one who is a starter and has been doing a great job as you never hear his name called which is the net thing if you are on the O line

2014

Seattle: 2 undrafted free agents still on the team Coyle a back up on defense and Gilliam a back up on O line. One on offense and one on defense

Packers: 3 undrafted free agents still on the team. J Thomas LB, J Elliot LB, M Pennel DL with all 3 being on defense

2015

Seattle: 1 undrafted free agent Rawls RB on offense

Packers: 1 undrafted free agent Gunter CB #3 or 4 behind Randall and Rollins

2016

Seattle: 4 undrafted free agents with Boykin, Fant, McEvoy, and Powell with one of these being on defense. There is one started though by default with Fant on the Oline

Packers: 4 undrafted free agents with Geronimo Allison a WR, Brice a safety, Hawkins a CB, and Dorlorient a CB. These were the CBs playing when Randall, Shields, and Rollins were out those 4 weeks or so when the DS sucked. They are #5, 6, 7 on the team.

Since this whole discussion has been about defense when looking at undrafted free agents we find here that:

Seattle has 2 undrafted defensive players on the current team that were signed between 2013 up until currently. But they do have one starter in Fant. Not sure how many other teams he would start in though.

Packers have 7 undrafted defensive players on the current team that were signed between 2013 up until currently. Gunter plays quite a bit as you saw last week, the others will be developed as back ups because the starting DBs are only i their second year. You saw they did quite well last week.

So to review

Seattle from 2013 to 2016 over those 4 years have 7 undrafted free agents on the team with 1 starter Fant. The amount of defensive undrafted free agents = 2

Green Bay from 2013 to 2016 over those 4 years have 9 undrafted free agents on the team with 1 starter Lane Taylor. The amount of defensive undrafted free agents = 7

So as I look at this and if your feelings are that Seattle does a great job with undrafted free agents as we look back over the last 4 drafts it appears the Packers have done a bit better with 2 more of them and the one starter being of much higher quality. When looking at the defense the Packers had 7 of them compared to 2 for Seattle.

So if the Hawks do a good job what word should I use to describe the Packers with it being a bit better then the Seahawks?

 

[SonnyCID]

As much as I despise our defense I would say Perry until the recent injury and Morgan have been far superior.

Ok, so 3rd best player.

 

[LambeauLegs]

Here's another little piece of info, not just about the seahawks, but about the nfl in general....

For most players, pretty much of any position outside of QB, there is relatively little dead money in the last year or two of their contract. The Seahawks are an excellent example of this, so money can actually come off the books easily if the player underperforms. If he's not underperforming, then it's not a problem. Unless of course you want to impress morons with your "draft skills" by giving a younger - less proven player his play time just because you drafted him.

In Peppers case it is not some young guy taking over for him. It is Nick Perry in his 5th year who was developed under Peppers.