Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from apdynasty23. Show apdynasty23's posts

    Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/15/agent-says-packers-getting-ready-to-release-woodson/

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from stegall85. Show stegall85's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    Given that the Pats secondary overall is young, Woodson might be a nice short term fill with his experience.

    He seems like more of a FS type than SS. Could be a decent fit at nickel CB assuming he's not looking for big money.

     

     

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from stegall85. Show stegall85's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    I agree the money will be key.

    All things being equal, I'd rather see them sign Reed. woodson might be a little cheaper though and is arguably more versatile as you can plug him in at CB in case of injury, etc.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from stegall85. Show stegall85's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    I hadn't thought of Adrian Wilson, but yeah he'd potentially be a nice fit as well.

    I also wonder about a guy like Antoine Winfield if he shakes loose. He's another older guy with no ring.

    I think the Vikes kicked him inside to nickel this past year. He's small but plays big, good open field tackler and could possibly play safety.

    The thing with a guy like Reed is he could be so valuable in sort of a teaching role to guys like McCourty and T.Wilson at the back end.

     

     

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    In response to ClarkGriswold's comment:

    In response to stegall85's comment:

     

    I hadn't thought of Adrian Wilson, but yeah he'd potentially be a nice fit as well.

    I also wonder about a guy like Antoine Winfield if he shakes loose. He's another older guy with no ring.

    I think the Vikes kicked him inside to nickel this past year. He's small but plays big, good open field tackler and could possibly play safety.

    The thing with a guy like Reed is he could be so valuable in sort of a teaching role to guys like McCourty and T.Wilson at the back end.

     

     

     




    Agree. I am secretly hoping the Saints are forced to have to cut Roman Harper. 


    http://www.rantsports.com/nfl/2013/02/13/nfl-rumors-new-orleans-saints-to-release-starting-ss/

    Dashon Goldson is another. The more the market floods, the better for us.




    Truthfully it doesn't matter if the market floods if you are 1 of the 2 top FA's at your position like Goldson. He'll get paid regardless. What it does impact though is the second teir FA's. The more flooded the market the less those second teir FA's (like Reed) will take to get

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rodimus77. Show Rodimus77's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    In response to ClarkGriswold's comment:

     

    It does for the age differential.  "Top tier" is subjective.  Goldson has more worth entering his prime years while guys like Woodson, Champ Bailey, Adrian Wilson, Reed, etc, do not.

     

    Some might think Goldson is top tier, while others might think the older players are.  It just depends what spot your defense is at right now.

    The more older players like the ones I just listed, who aren't done, but would be great in the right spot for 2 more years, keep getting cut, that's going to lower the prices down, where it's a race for those guys to sell themselves on getting into that good situation.

    I am pretty sure a guy like Adrian Wilson doesn't want to go play for a team years away or maybe a team that's got a flimsy playoff shot.

    A guy like Roman Harper, at age 30, although not as big of a name as the vets listed above, is a bit younger, but probably not as impactful a player. 

     



    You answered my question before I could ask you Russ

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from CaptainZdeno33. Show CaptainZdeno33's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    Meh, never really liked Woodson after his constant complaining about the tuck rule.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from nomadfan. Show nomadfan's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    Woodson did not have as an embarassing performance as Champ Bailey did in that playoff loss to the Raven.

     
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from NEGAME2. Show NEGAME2's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    Brady and Woodson back together  add Tony Gonzalez!!!!! bring on the Super Bowl!!!

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from natesubs. Show natesubs's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    i am loving how many SS are on the market right now!  Reed, gholdson, bailey, woodson, grimes....... maybe we can get one cheap!

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    We need a cover S, McCourty can be the deep S, but we need someone who can contest a TE because Gregory isn't the guy. 

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    In response to NEGAME2's comment:

    Brady and Woodson back together  add Tony Gonzalez!!!!! bring on the Super Bowl!!!

     



    We don't need Gonzo, luv, we've already got the best (EVER) in Gronk along with Ballard. I'm assuming we keep Fells as the blocking TE, but Gonzalez isn't need. That is, unless he's coming for a vet min. 

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    In response to natesubs' comment:

    i am loving how many SS are on the market right now!  Reed, gholdson, bailey, woodson, grimes....... maybe we can get one cheap!



    I doubt Bailey would want to play S, he's still got some good CB in him. Maybe not as a #1, but  he can still play CB. And I doubt Brent Grimes would switch to S, I'm sure he'd want the cash as a CB and he's like 185 pounds. 

     

    No way do I want someone who weighs less than McCourty back there. 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    In response to natesubs' comment:

     

    i am loving how many SS are on the market right now!  Reed, gholdson, bailey, woodson, grimes....... maybe we can get one cheap!

     



    Grimes is a CB, maybe you mean William Moore of ATL? At 220 lbs, he fits the bill.  He's also 27 so may be around for four or five years.

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    Geez Rusty, the Packers releasing Woodson will give the Packers 10 million dollars in cap space...that can't be possible with "salary cap hell" lurking around, can it? So let me get this straight, the packers signed Woodson to big money - he then helped them win a Super Bowl - they then cut him when he got old (36) and expensive to their cap. How can this be? Aren't teams not supposed to be able to do this? It will land them in hell!! Paying big for a player (that is really good) gets you nowhere - it just screws up your cap and you get yourself into "salary cap hell"..there is no way out! That is what you've been telling us for years, yet four teams over the last two weeks have shaved a combined 36 million off their payrolls without cutting one single player that is not old and way past their prime. Those very same teams will now go out and spend that available cap space on younger players heading into their prime. Interesting. Amazing. And yet confusing/puzzling to one. 

    Glad you have this salary cap stuff figured out rusty - keep us informed of any new/cutting edge developments on the subject. 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from NOISE. Show NOISE's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    Woodson and Reed are old, no secrets here.  If pats feel they want all in on a safety, then their target should be D Goldson From 49 ers....

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    Watching a football program yesterday and they said Woodson is now only a 25-30 play player.  Screw that!  We need an every down player back there.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.

    In response to ClarkGriswold's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    Geez Rusty, the Packers releasing Woodson will give the Packers 10 million dollars in cap space...that can't be possible with "salary cap hell" lurking around, can it? So let me get this straight, the packers signed Woodson to big money - he then helped them win a Super Bowl - they then cut him when he got old (36) and expensive to their cap. How can this be? Aren't teams not supposed to be able to do this? It will land them in hell!! Paying big for a player (that is really good) gets you nowhere - it just screws up your cap and you get yourself into "salary cap hell"..there is no way out! That is what you've been telling us for years, yet four teams over the last two weeks have shaved a combined 36 million off their payrolls without cutting one single player that is not old and way past their prime. Those very same teams will now go out and spend that available cap space on younger players heading into their prime. Interesting. Amazing. And yet confusing/puzzling to one. 

    Glad you have this salary cap stuff figured out rusty - keep us informed of any new/cutting edge developments on the subject. 

     



    You act as if Woodson hasn't been a good player for them and whoever replaces him will be as good or better.

     

    This is what you don't get. If BB had to release a key cog on our D, you'd not only string him up here whining like a 6 year old girl who just wet her panties, but you still wouldn't understand why imporant cuts hurt a team.

    In all honesty, I'd need to take a ride on a short bus to see someone as stupid as you are.  It's unbelievable, I am sure to most here, that you are in a fact a teacher.   WOW



    Look at it this way - the packers signed a guy to a big and scary salary cap hell contract - he then went on and lived up to that contract and won a Super Bowl in the process. Now at the ripe old age of 36, the packers terminated that big old scary contract and saved themselves 10 million to go out and find a younger and better player. Business as usual in the NFL...some understand that (you don't), but some do.

    now you are correct, they may not find someone better than the younger version of the 36 year old Woodson to play safety for them, but they should be able to replace the older version at a fraction of the cost. Unless of course they waste time and resources bringing in guys like Chung, Bodden, Butler, Dowling and Wilson - then that would be a waste of money and the few resources (draft selections) that the NFL allows. That would hurt.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share