From Lambeau to Lombardi, Holmgren, McCarthy and LaFleur and from Starr to Favre, Rodgers and now Jordan Love we’re talking Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers football. This Packers Forum is the place to talk NFL football and everything Packers. So, pull up a keyboard, make yourself at home and let’s talk some Packers football.
I think Captain Ben made a good point, Hayward fell out of favor with the coaches and obviously Thompson or he wouldn't have drafted 2 CB's in the first and 2nd round, Hayward after his injury was never the same player he was as a rookie, obvious when ya look at the stats, and remember back to how he played, he didn't want to play physical imho, most of his tackles where 5 yrds or more from the los, thats what I remember, and his pass defensed numbers plummeted from 21 as a rookie to never above 7 his remaining years with us.
None of this is backed by anything factual aside from those random stats that could be the result of any number of other variables.
heres what I think, he wanted more from us then we'd give, and the best he could get on the market was what SDC gave him, 6+ mil, chump change for the CB you think he was for us.
Here's what I think: it would have taken chump change plus 1 to retain him. The Packer FO, based upon input from the coaching staff, never attempted to retain him. They wrongly assumed the two players drafted to replace Hayward and Hyde were competent players. They weren't. They were wrong.
Smart teams don't beat themselves against a wall. They don't consistantly throw at the best CB. If there is a tiger at the door you try another door. If there are few targets there are fewer PDs. Hayward was our best CB when we let him go for a cheap 5 mil. He remained a top CB after his All Pro seasons. And teams constantly draft CBs because you eventually have to pay them and they get injured.
Shields was our best CB, and hayward was never able to win the start on the other side.
I find it peculiar that as a rookie with us opponents threw to his coverage so often that he had 21 PD's, then they quit throwing to him till he went to the Chargers where they threw at him more often for his first two seasons( or till he was paid hand somely) then quit throwing to his coverage again
just look at his stats, he never regained or kept the lock down CB status he had as a rookie with us or his 2 PB seasons with the chargers, opponent QB's never had a below 80 passer rating against him either, these stats show that Cassy never really played up to the contract the Chargers gave him in 2018, they let him walk and he went back to making around 4 mil. a season elsewhere.
The Packer FO, based upon input from the coaching staff, never attempted to retain him.
It is not clear how much the coaching staff had to do with it. It is certainly possible they told the FO that Hayward didn't have a role and/or hyped up the rookies to make them think Hayward was expendable.
But sometimes there is a disconnect between coaches and management where the coaches want a guy back, but management has other priorities. We also have to consider that in the 2010s, we had to pinch pennies a lot more, because we had lots of star players on hefty contracts.
But yes, Hayward himself has said that the Packers did not make him an offer, at all.
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
I think Captain Ben made a good point, Hayward fell out of favor with the coaches and obviously Thompson or he wouldn't have drafted 2 CB's in the first and 2nd round, Hayward after his injury was never the same player he was as a rookie, obvious when ya look at the stats, and remember back to how he played, he didn't want to play physical imho, most of his tackles where 5 yrds or more from the los, thats what I remember, and his pass defensed numbers plummeted from 21 as a rookie to never above 7 his remaining years with us.
None of this is backed by anything factual aside from those random stats that could be the result of any number of other variables.
heres what I think, he wanted more from us then we'd give, and the best he could get on the market was what SDC gave him, 6+ mil, chump change for the CB you think he was for us.
Here's what I think: it would have taken chump change plus 1 to retain him. The Packer FO, based upon input from the coaching staff, never attempted to retain him. They wrongly assumed the two players drafted to replace Hayward and Hyde were competent players. They weren't. They were wrong.
again you assume that Capers didn't know what he was doing, Clinton Dix his first couple seasons played well, better then Hyde ever played the position for us, and Hayward actually didn't play back to rookie form ever again, not with us anyway, and barely for SD OR LAC, they gave him a huge pay raise and I'am sure regretted doing that because he reverted right back to mediocre that same season, go look at the stats, when opposing QB's have a 80 plus QBR your not exactly some lock down CB worth 12 mil a year, again Cassy rededicated himself to becoming RICH, and it worked, then he floated, and was dumped as soon as that contract ended, and he was never all pro either, two PB's thats it.
The Packers still have plenty of cap room to work with after locking up Crosby. Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson and chief negotiator Russ Ball have $19,638,854 remaining in salary cap space to address their 16 pending free agents and any outside acquisitions they’d like to entertain.
The Green Bay Packers enter the 2017 offseason in good shape when it comes to the salary cap.
According to Spotrac, the Packers currently have a cap total of $144,703,575, and with the NFL salary cap set at $175,984,687, the Packers currently have a cap space of $31,281,112.
Both Hayward and Hyde were well within affordable range as evidenced by the contracts they signed. The choice was made to cut ties.
Now, that said, I don't disagree the FO is sometimes forced into tough decisions based upon assumptions and expectations for younger, ascending players at premium positions. Sometimes it doesn't make sense to resign veterans when their replacements are already in-house. However, in this case, the roster evaluations made that led to the decisions on Hyde and Hayward failed. History bares this out.
human nature for a player leaving one team to exert more devotion towards improving for there next team, happens all the time, yet you and Pckfn completely avoid that discussion
This will be the 4th time now that I have said this, but I agree moving to a new team does light a fire under players. Never have avoided that discussion or disagreed with the point.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
Now, that said, I don't disagree the FO is sometimes forced into tough decisions based upon assumptions and expectations for younger, ascending players at premium positions. Sometimes it doesn't make sense to resign veterans when their replacements are already in-house. However, in this case, the roster evaluations made that led to the decisions on Hyde and Hayward failed. History bares this out.
Agreed.
I do think letting Hyde walk was excusable because we had to play him at CB out of necessity, there was no way for us to give him the position change to S (which made him a star for Buffalo) while he was with us.
Letting Hayward go for a paltry $5m was a blunder.
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
This is where I have to confess that I was cool with them letting Hayward go. He looked like he wasn't going to get back to his pre-injury form at the time.
Letting Hyde go was a different matter. I wanted him to stay.
“We didn’t lose the game; we just ran out of time.”
- Vince Lombardi
This is where I have to confess that I was cool with them letting Hayward go. He looked like he wasn't going to get back to his pre-injury form at the time.
Letting Hyde go was a different matter. I wanted him to stay.
another situation of a player wanting starter money, but couldn't break the starting line up over Dix or Morgan Burnett, while we may have had cap dollars to afford him Ted was always pocket book weary, basically same thing with Hayward, for whatever reason we did even offer to renew his contract, even at the low rate he got with the Chargers,
human nature for a player leaving one team to exert more devotion towards improving for there next team, happens all the time, yet you and Pckfn completely avoid that discussion
This will be the 4th time now that I have said this, but I agree moving to a new team does light a fire under players. Never have avoided that discussion or disagreed with the point.
I apologize then, the more I read about Cassy Hayward the more I think this did happen, true, a QB wont throw to a players coverage if that player is a lock down cornerback, but that didn't stop them his first two seasons with LAC when he had 20 PD's each of those seasons, however the 3 years that followed QB's had a plus 80 Passer rating against him, so they threw at him plenty, and as with us after his rookie season his PD numbers drastically declined.
Leads me to believe Cassy upped his game for a pay check, and he got it.
I also believe we made the wrong decision as a front office and sold him short as a coaching staff.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
I also believe we made the wrong decision as a front office and sold him short as a coaching staff.
see that last part is a real stretch for me, it says that a coach who specialized in the secondary before he became a excellent DC couldn't spot talent, a coach who was able to help produce not only Woodson into a all pro, but also the very raw Shields, same with Collins just to name a few, to me Hayward had it, got hurt, and didn't show the effort or ability to regain the form he had as a rookie, and was let go for minimal starter money.
I also believe we made the wrong decision as a front office and sold him short as a coaching staff.
Absolutely. They can both be true.
Except the contention of a blundering defensive staff/FO failed strategy is probably true-er...
the two picks that where to replace Hayward and Hyde didn't pan out, but what has changed with our defense? if Capers had the talent of these last 5 years I'd bet on a better product, Capers problems where missed draft picks and health of of the players he did have, zip at lber for ever, complete position void at CB of starter talent, weak DL, A SS that played more like a lber to often.
Capers was a scape goat, and stayed as long as he did because McCarthy and Ted both new he wasn't the reason the defense struggled, it was lack of talent
It’s what happens when multiple people see the obvious point where things pivoted to failure.
I did like Savage but he wasn’t a first round prospect. I didn’t think he was the best S on the class. He was up there but he wasn’t the best nor was he worst trading up for. It’s even more clear now.
DK Metcalf was the best pick. No question about that. I said it then. I’ve said it since. I say it now. In the history of Packers selections no pick has been so obvious. We needed a field stretching playmaker to compliment Adams who wasn’t ass cheeks like MVS.
Instead we move up for a bust instead of just sitting out and taking the obvious pick that helps us, and move up in the 2nd to take a safer safety prospect in the 2nd round who probably equally busts. I liked Thornhill, Adderly, and Rapp all equally or more than Savage.
Is Ike stealing my material? The Hyde snafu was always my brainy idea. You don't jettison team captains unless they're arrogant QBs. Our GMs have no clue why helmets are so advanced now either.
Is Ike stealing my material? The Hyde snafu was always my brainy idea. You don't jettison team captains unless they're arrogant QBs. Our GMs have no clue why helmets are so advanced now either.
Attachments
jim-halpert-face (1).gif (315.18 KiB) Viewed 7386 times
