Will the Packers Make a Run at Xavier McKinney?

The former Giants safety is set to be one of the best on the market, could the Packers be serious bidders?

NFL free agency begins next week. As a Packer fan in the last 10-15 years, you can usually say "Oh, that's this week?" The Green Bay Packers are famously very inactive when it comes to signing any of the top names on the market. The rumors will fly, agents will say that the Packers have interest, and fans will get their hopes up, only for the fans that know better to let out a chuckle as the only free agent signing ends up being a Special Teams gunner that'll maybe end up becoming the team's third-string safety. The team is famous for bargain bin hunting. They'd much rather find that cheaper diamond in the rough or fill team needs with draft picks than overspend in free agency. For the most part, it's worked to their advantage. 

But this year, and I do slightly hesitate to say this, could be a little different. With one of the youngest teams in the league and a few holes to be filled on the roster, it may be wise to bring in a few more veterans to take those spots. Even though most of the team's experience is on the defensive side of the ball already, with a new defensive coordinator and scheme entering the building, it may be a good idea to fill any defensive holes with a veteran or two. One of those positions of need is Safety. With the team seemingly letting Darnell Savage, Jonathan Owens, and Rudy Ford walk, they will need some better options for the position. Perhaps one, maybe two of those will be re-signed to a one-year deal for 2024, but that still leaves a void in the Packers defensive backfield.

Tuesday afternoon as teams were electing whether or not to use the franchise tag on their potential free agents, news broke that the New York Giants would not be tagging Safety Xavier McKinney. This means next week, McKinney will be free to begin talks on a new contract with any interested team he chooses. There is a caveat of course that the Giants could have elected not to use the tag on McKinney to afford them more time to work out a new contract. But with the team possibly moving in a new direction and pushing an influx of youth, they could let McKinney hit the market. If he does, the Packers are expected to be potential suitors. 

Many believe McKinney could ask for a deal in the range of $17.5M-$18M annually. But few believe he will end up with that deal. It's said he could likely fit in the $13.5M annually range on a four-year deal. I could see the Packers perhaps maneuvering the numbers to have him around that range, but loading the contract with incentives he could achieve to receive even more money in his pocket that wouldn't exactly count against the cap.

What does Xavier McKinney bring?

Without looking at any statistics, one of the first things I notice with Xavier McKinney is that he is currently 24 years of age, and won't turn 25 until about the start of the Preseason on August 9th. Some of the players entering the league via the NFL draft in April are already 24-25 years of age. A four-year deal would place McKinney at 28 by the time the contract expires and still in line for another possible 2-4-year deal without age being a big hesitation. And don't think that young age means a lack of leadership skill, as McKinney served as a team captain of the Giants' defense for 2 of his last 4 years on the team. 

"Xavier McKinney is arguably coming off one of his best seasons in the NFL where he played every snap on the Giants' defense, logging a career-high 116 tackles. He also logged two fumble recoveries and forced another, had three interceptions, and logged 11 passes defended. When searching the web for player stats and information, ensuring online security becomes paramount for fans. Utilizing a reliable PrizePicks VPN can offer peace of mind by safeguarding sensitive information and providing secure access to sports updates and highlights."

But how does he fit what the Packers want to do with new defensive coordinator Jeff Hafley?

It is believed that Hafley will be running a deep safety role on passing downs. Xavier McKinney has shown in his four seasons with the Giants that he has great recognition and speed to go from back-pedaling in the middle of the field to turning on the jets toward the sideline to close in on a receiver running a post-route and break up the pass. Or even make the interception. Another notch in the positives column for McKinney is that he does not miss many tackles. He's about as close as you can get to a sure-tackler for a safety and that would be a very welcome addition to this Packers team that has very much lacked in that column as far as the secondary goes. That idea alone almost makes me want the Packers to pay him whatever he wants. 

In the NFL lately, it seems to have a few connections to potential free agents already in your building can help sway those candidates in your favor. Derrick Ansley was the lead recruiter and a coach for Xavier McKinney in Alabama. Now, Derrick Ansley is the Packers' new defensive passing game coordinator under Jeff Hafley. Also, Xavier McKinney shares an agent with Jordan Love. While the familiarity with a defensive coach could be a nice bonus for the Packers, the agent sharing is more from a networking perspective. If McKinney is interested in Green Bay, his agent will have familiarity with how the Packers negotiate and can give him a heads-up on what to expect, as well as McKinney could reach out to Jordan Love himself easily to gain an understanding of the locker room and the environment he'll be walking into if he chooses Green Bay.

There are several free-agent safeties on the market in 2024 that the Packers could have their eyes on. Jordan Fuller from the Rams could be another great option for the Packers. But I like what I see from McKinney just a little more in terms of production, age, and leadership. If we're going to pay a pretty penny for the safety position this off-season, I would love to see Xavier McKinney in a Packers uniform to start 2024. 

 

PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.

__________________________

Greg Meinholz is a lifelong devoted Packer fan. A contributor to CheeseheadTV as well as PackersTalk. Follow him on Twitter @gmeinholz for Packers commentary, random humor, beer endorsements, and occasional Star Wars and Marvel ramblings.

__________________________

12 points
 

Comments (68)

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

March 06, 2024 at 12:30 pm

I remember when TT went out on a limb and brought in Charles Woodson... I think Gute should go for it here with XM.. I think he might be able to really bust out in the system Hafley is bringing in.

8 points
8
0
WestCoastPackerBacker's picture

March 06, 2024 at 01:59 pm

The situation is quite different, given that McKinney is coming off maybe his best season, and Woodson was coming off two seasons with various injuries, including a broken leg. The Raiders didn't want him and Tampa Bay was the only other suitor. In this case, McKinney will be valued by other teams, including the Giants.

But we can hope!

5 points
5
0
CoachJV's picture

March 06, 2024 at 02:29 pm

That's true... I was more referring to the magnitude of the signing, should it happen...

0 points
0
0
murf7777's picture

March 06, 2024 at 02:53 pm

Could only hope XM could come close to Woodson results, I doubt it as Woodson set a very high bar, but there's always hope....Woodson is on my top 5 Packers of all time.

3 points
3
0
Bitternotsour's picture

March 06, 2024 at 02:59 pm

except for woodson being a generational talent the situations are exactly the same.

this is the time of the year that the comments board begins to resemble stoned discussions in a dorm room.

-2 points
3
5
13TimeChamps's picture

March 06, 2024 at 03:24 pm

You're the only one who appears to be stoned.

The situations are completely different. Woodson was about to turn 30 when he signed with GB, and was coming off the two worst seasons of his career and had completely worn out his welcome with the Raiders. GB was the only team to offer him a contract.

McKinney is 24 and coming off the best season of his career and will be in huge demand this offseason. The situations couldn't be any more different.

3 points
4
1
Coldworld's picture

March 06, 2024 at 04:56 pm

Woodson was also cheap and became hungry once the situation here ignited him. McKinney is younger but I’m not willing to put him in the same level as Woodson as a player. He’s also going to cost a great deal. Woodson was essentially a very low risk deal.

McKinnie is good enough and young enough at a position of almost total need that I could understand a long term investment. However it’s a much bigger commitment than Woodson was and I think the chances are that he’s not close to as good or influential as Woodson was in his time here. McKinnie is about the only candidate I’d even want them to entertain anything close to this scale of contract for this year.

Overall, I still don’t think it’s likely to be worth it at the kind of costs being bandied about. A lesser deal for fuller or a couple of others, coupled with drafting will give us more options next year. It’s not preposterous, just not the right time and value when there are other avenues to competency this year and looking beyond it that don’t restrict other options as much.

4 points
4
0
Bitternotsour's picture

March 06, 2024 at 05:59 pm

Cheap? I guess comparatively, but he earned $10.6 M in 2006 dollars his first year. He was paid commensurate with the top cornerbacks in football, more I believe than Al Harris. Ted was tight with a dollar, but he wasn't stupid.

Also, unlike the brilliant young McKinney, Charles was the defensive rookie of the year and was all pro in his first season. But other than that and his hall of fame career, he was clearly a reach signing by Ted. McKinney is a sure thing, first ballot hall of famer apparently.

-3 points
1
4
Coldworld's picture

March 06, 2024 at 06:35 pm

Woodson got front end cash but after that the cost dropped. $10.5 million in the first year of the deal and $18 million over the first three years overall (of 7). The deal gave the Packers a controlled out, Woodson some near guaranteed cash and too Tampa out of the picture.

1 points
1
0
WestCoastPackerBacker's picture

March 07, 2024 at 02:46 pm

I beg to differ that Woodson was cheap. From an article back then
"The agreement is a seven-year deal that can be worth as much as $52 million, ESPN.com's Michael Smith reports. Woodson will make $10.5 million in the first year of the deal and $18 million over the first three years. " Looking at the top salaries of CBs in 2006, Woodson's yearly average came in third, behind Chris McAllister and Champ Bailey. Woodson was making a competitive salary when signed by GB. They didn't low ball him.

And yes, it's very unlikely McKinney would be as good as Woodson, who went on to win DPOY in 2009, 3 years into his deal.

0 points
0
0
LambeauPlain's picture

March 06, 2024 at 05:01 pm

Agree, totally different. Packers will have substantial competition for this potential FA DB. Ted offered Woodson a deal probably on par with what XM may get in today's dollars...but landing him will be far, far more difficult.

As you point out, the demand for XM will be far greater than what it was for Sir Charles who was viewed as a good player but coming off a serious injury and a risk of being on the decline (age 30 for a CB?). Ted took a surprising "raised eyebrows" big swing to lure Woodson with a big payday, his only real possible payday ....and it turned out to be his best FA hire.

And at the time in 2006, the DB room was deep.

No so with XM and the Packer DB room today. He will get a big payday as an ascending player with options of where to play. And the Packers need a talent like XM more today than they needed Woodson in 2006.

1 points
1
0
Bitternotsour's picture

March 06, 2024 at 05:45 pm

Yeah - you're right. Woodson was washed. Wasted signing.

And, you're right. Legal weed in Oregon, I'm often high. Fortunately, intoxicants wear off, but stupid sadly, is forever.

-3 points
1
4
LambeauPlain's picture

March 06, 2024 at 06:03 pm

13 never even broached how the signing turned out. Who on this thread is saying Woodson was a "wasted signing"? No one. That's just gaslighting.

The comment compared is signing Woodson then, vs signing XM now.

And while you may be high...I don't think you are stupid.

2 points
2
0
13TimeChamps's picture

March 06, 2024 at 06:09 pm

I never said it was a wasted signing. It obviously turned out to be one of best FA signings in GB's history. My point was it's a totally different situation now with McKinney's situation than it was when Woodsen became available. I'm sorry you don't see the distinction.

If, in the unlikely event they sign McKinney, we can only hope he turns out to be anywhere near the player Woodsen was for GB.

As far as weed goes, I grew out of that scene decades ago, but by all means, be yourself.

4 points
4
0
Oppy's picture

March 06, 2024 at 07:50 pm

Bitternotsour's sarcasm seems to be flying over everyone's head.

-3 points
2
5
LLCHESTY's picture

March 06, 2024 at 04:50 pm

McKinney isn't close to being the athlete Woodson was. Apples and oranges.

4 points
4
0
Coldworld's picture

March 06, 2024 at 05:13 pm

Woodson, once he decided to turn up mentally not merely preen, was not just one of the best athletes to play CB, but also had a supremely instinctive ability to read and anticipate. He was all that and essentially the size of a modern small ILB and not shy of contact. A near unique talent.

1 points
2
1
WestCoastPackerBacker's picture

March 07, 2024 at 02:49 pm

Yes, when you win the Heisman, win the college championship, win an NFL Title and are named DPOY, you're in really rare company. Anybody do that

0 points
0
0
splitpea1's picture

March 06, 2024 at 12:37 pm

A lot of good points made in this article and I like the connections angle. McKinney has elite coverage grades and rarely misses open field tackles. He's also a leader in the locker room, something the Packers defense could use more of. Last season was his best season, so he timed his entry into the market perfectly. Filling the deep safety role is essential and probably better to do it with a veteran instead of having to gamble on a rookie to start right away, even with a high draft pedigree. So the Packers should seriously consider this option if a reasonable deal can be reached. You're never going to be a great defense without highly capable safety play, and it was the right decision to cut the cord with couple of our previous ones.

5 points
5
0
Starrbrite's picture

March 06, 2024 at 09:34 pm

Agree—great defense includes a good/great safety.

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

March 06, 2024 at 12:45 pm

I don't want to pay this guy 13mil -20mil.
Because thats the salary of a top 10 safety.
Pay Love first. Draft it; even if we convert a cb.

-4 points
5
9
Cheezehead72's picture

March 06, 2024 at 01:00 pm

We can do both once we cut Bakh. Now I am not saying that we should pay him 13 million plus but he is a good player that is young with lots of experience and is what we need.

I am sure there is a team out there that will pay him close to 18 mil or give him a lot of guaranteed money.

1 points
1
0
CoachJV's picture

March 06, 2024 at 02:30 pm

Let's hope he favors a potential contender with a high ceiling over money...

2 points
2
0
T7Steve's picture

March 06, 2024 at 12:48 pm

What's a sure tackler? HA!

Music to my ears.

I like the idea of going young.

If he would be in the back, then in the box is better suited for Owens and Ford I think, so it might work out while they get another one in the draft too.

Still wonder about Savage. His first season was so promising, yet his tackling is suspect. Still hate to see first rounders going down the road.

0 points
0
0
jhtobias's picture

March 06, 2024 at 12:58 pm

Why do people keep sayinh "I dont want to pay this guy that money"

First off it is not your money. Secound your the first people to complain that we suck ar saftey when they go after minimum guys.

These people remind me of customers who want to pay 2 dollars for a meal but expect 5 star service and 5 star product for their 2 bucks

Annoying as can be

12 points
15
3
jannes bjornson's picture

March 06, 2024 at 03:48 pm

" More bread, please."

3 points
3
0
Cheezehead72's picture

March 06, 2024 at 01:07 pm

If Gute believes he is what we need then he needs to get into the bidding war for his services. That is his job. I am sure there is another team that will out bid us. Yes I do not want to over pay the man but it is a gapping hole.

What will happen is another team will get him and we will sign a middle tier safety and ILB and hope for two over achievers. That is not a bad situation.

-1 points
2
3
MooPack's picture

March 06, 2024 at 01:19 pm

With a weak Safety draft class, the team's biggest need, and Xavier being the best on the market, I'd say they will give it their best shot. Does the kid just look at the money or does a team like the Packers weigh on his decision? Hopefully the latter.

5 points
5
0
murf7777's picture

March 06, 2024 at 03:02 pm

Hate to say it cuz I'm big Packer fan but Playing in GB isn't very appealing for most players. Let's face it, it isn't very appealing for most people in general. For a variety of reasons, start with cold weather, small city without much of a night life and a State with higher than average state taxes. If all or any of those are a negative to the FA, GB would have to pay a premium and not get a discount to land them. That's not to say GB doesn't have positives, but will they outweigh the negatives I listed?

1 points
1
0
MooPack's picture

March 06, 2024 at 03:12 pm

He lived/played in NY. Weather probably not as big an issue.
NY state taxes!? enough said.
Tuscaloosa, Alabama is not a meca of people. I'm sure he's been used to it.

3 points
3
0
murf7777's picture

March 06, 2024 at 06:24 pm

It’s not where he played and he was drafted there. It’s about having the choice of where to go in FA

1 points
1
0
MooPack's picture

March 06, 2024 at 06:37 pm

Nah, that pretty much falls flat to me.

0 points
0
0
GregC's picture

March 06, 2024 at 04:52 pm

Plus we don't have Aaron Rodgers anymore ha ha.

0 points
0
0
Bitternotsour's picture

March 06, 2024 at 09:48 pm

it's only a weak safety class if you don't draft the right safety. also, a weak safety class as compared to what exactly. Show me a strong safety class, I'm truly interested.

I'm not remembering that many first round safeties. Maybe I'm drawing a blank.

As with everything in life, it only takes one.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 07, 2024 at 05:01 pm

I dunno if the opportunity to join a young and up and coming team, be a respected leader and get adored and paid handsomely is not enough of an incentive or advantage?

1 points
1
0
golfpacker1's picture

March 06, 2024 at 03:12 pm

I just laugh when you guys say "I don't care what it costs, just sign him." Or another good one is "It's not your money, stop being so cheap." Or how about "Whoever is the best FA player available, that's the one we want."

It's a good thing you guys are not in charge of signing or paying the players. There is this crazy thing called the "Salary Cap" and its only got so many dollars every year that teams can spend.

McKinney is very good, but just like Patrick Queen, and Antoine Winfield, he will be out of our FA targets because he is too damn expensive. I have actually seen projections for McKinney @ $10 million to $14 million. I would be ok if it was closer to the $10 million figure because he is young. And the better 2nd tier Safeties will cost between $5 and $7 million per year. But I think it will go closer to that higher figure because of multiple suiters, and his talent.

The bottom line is we probably have about $20 million to spend on FAs this year, and we shouldn't try to blow it all on one player. Are any of those 3, Queen, Winfield, and Mckinney worth $10 to $14 million more than players the next tier down? We would be way better off if we could spend that $20 million on 3 good FAs that fill holes and upgrade the team @ Safety, LB, and Edge. GB will be almost out of salary cap hell in 2025, let's not fall back in.

2 points
3
1
Duhawk_47's picture

March 06, 2024 at 03:50 pm

Hey I appreciate your thoughts on this. As a non-cap-guru, I often wonder why Packers fans are so obsessed with getting out of cap hell...seemingly so that we have the "option" to sign stars in the future?

During the past two offseasons, one thing that keeps jumping out at me is the fact that MOST of the 10-12 teams with massive cap space and ability to make major moves in the FA market are....well, they stink. On the other hand, of course, you have the the 10-12 teams in the worst cap positions for 2024 who are predominantly contenders. Seems to me that a lot of this comes down to timing. When you perceive your window to be open, you pull the trigger.

Personally, I'd hate to miss out on a potential difference-maker type of player, such as McKinney, to potentially have an additional $10-20mil to play with in a couple of years. By that time, our cap picture will certainly look different based on who we are giving second contracts to, extending, or releasing, etc. Just some food for thought. GPG!

3 points
4
1
Oppy's picture

March 06, 2024 at 07:55 pm

The Packers were almost always in a healthy position cap wise under Ted Thompson, and almost always were considered a threat to make a run at a Lombardi.

When your cap-strangled, it forces you to make concessions that can hurt the team. You know, like keeping shitty, old players around because cutting them on the back end of their contract costs more than you can afford to give up, and then when a talented young player becomes available, you have to sacrifice the future to even entertain signing him.

Healthy cap management is not the exclusive domain of cellar dwellers, and it's worth aspiring towards.

0 points
2
2
Bitternotsour's picture

March 06, 2024 at 09:50 pm

Wisdom dispensed on the cheap

0 points
0
0
golfpacker1's picture

March 07, 2024 at 09:15 am

Hey Duhawk, I am learning more about the salary cap all the time too. What I do know for sure is that players' salaries are going up all the time, and this was the first year that the NFL did something about it by making a substantial increase. QB salaries alone have been jumping as much as the normal increases. The next move they make should be to increase from 53 to 60 on game day rosters.

I would hate to miss on McKinney too, and I think if GB could sign him immediately for no more than $11 mill per year, I am OK with that. But more than that really hampers chances to sign a good LB and another sneaky need @ Edge. We should be trying to upgrade our weak positions with FA and the draft. But we don't need the most expensive FAs to do that. In 2019 we blew open Fort Knox to sign 4 big FAs, and they played well for the Packers for a while. It did not win any championships and it started the kicking the can down the road to cap oblivion.

Overspending leads to renegotiating contracts and pushing money into future years, which leads to players being off the team but still getting paid for years. We are close to getting out of that boat anchor of a problem.

1 points
1
0
Duhawk_47's picture

March 13, 2024 at 09:44 am

Well, here we are now! This will be a good convo to bookmark for 2-3 offseasons down the road.

0 points
0
0
GregC's picture

March 06, 2024 at 05:35 pm

If anyone actually said, "I don't care what it costs, just sign him," they are obviously stupid. I'm seeing much more of the opposite opinion, which is to pretty much dismiss the idea out of hand that the Packers might sign a high-priced free agent. This is usually accompanied by lists of free agents who did not work out.

Well, it wasn't so long ago that the Packers paid big money for Za'Darius Smith and Preston Smith, and both of them proved to be good investments. That same year, they got Adrian Amos and Billy Turner, who were more mid-level free agents, and both of them paid off as well. This defense would look VERY interesting with the addition of, say, a high-level free agent safety and a mid- to high-level free agent linebacker. Or maybe two safeties, with or without a good free agent linebacker.

2 points
2
0
LLCHESTY's picture

March 06, 2024 at 04:49 pm

Kinchens
10 yard split-1.59
40-4.65

McKinney
10 yard split-1.65
40-4.63

🤔

3 points
4
1
Bitternotsour's picture

March 06, 2024 at 06:15 pm

unpossible.

1 points
1
0
murf7777's picture

March 06, 2024 at 06:26 pm

LL, as you know there are always exceptions….Personally, I wouldn’t take the risk on Kinchens.

2 points
3
1
LLCHESTY's picture

March 06, 2024 at 08:06 pm

A lot depends on his pro day and how far he falls. He falls like Enagbare did a couple years ago I sure hope they'd draft him.

2 points
2
0
murf7777's picture

March 07, 2024 at 07:38 am

Certainly, if he falls past round 2 where he’s been projected that’s a different story. My thoughts are I wouldn’t invest a 2nd rounder on him.

-1 points
0
1
golfpacker1's picture

March 07, 2024 at 09:26 am

Thanks for showing that LL. Kinchens didn't suddenly turn into a bag of $hit overnight. Not everyone has to run 4.39 to be a really good productive player. And there are plenty of really fast players that sit the bench too. Barring Kinchens running a 4.45 @ his pro day, we might be in a great position to grab a really good player @ a super big position of need 20 to 40 spots lower than we would have before the combine.

And showing that also proves why Fuller, Blackmon, or Whitehead might be great, young, cost effective upgrades @ Safety and will cost us $8 million less than McKinney, or Curl, Jamal Adams, or Budda Baker.

.

1 points
1
0
KKB's picture

March 06, 2024 at 05:49 pm

Rasul was cut by the Bills. BRING HIM BACK

0 points
1
1
LambeauPlain's picture

March 06, 2024 at 06:07 pm

Sul's K is being restructured by the Bills to gain some cap space...he will remain a Bill.

2 points
2
0
Matt's picture

March 07, 2024 at 04:35 am

Trading Rasul was Gutekunst's worst decision ever.

1 points
3
2
LambeauPlain's picture

March 07, 2024 at 06:56 am

The decision cannot be evaluated for several years until the 3rd rounder they received is made...and that player has a few years on the field.

-1 points
0
1
Bitternotsour's picture

March 07, 2024 at 09:31 am

My assumption is you jest. Gutekunst got a third round draft choice for a guy who just got cut. A guy who would have been cut by the Packers. Besides the third round pick, they got cap relief. That was executive of the year material there. The Bills literally rented him for a half season for a third round draft choice - crazy.

Arguably, the Packers defense improved with his being subtracted from the roster.

-2 points
0
2
13TimeChamps's picture

March 07, 2024 at 09:58 am

"The Bills literally rented him for a half season for a third round draft choice - crazy."

Nope. The Bills literally restructured his contract to save on their cap. Not crazy at all.

1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 07, 2024 at 05:39 pm

Four Ints, one for a pick six and a couple fumble recoveries since leaving cheese land. The Bills stole him for a speculative three pick and got a number five included in the deal. All righty then...

0 points
0
0
HawkPacker's picture

March 07, 2024 at 10:06 am

Nope! We gave them our 5th round pick too!

1 points
1
0
CoachJV's picture

March 07, 2024 at 05:26 pm

Gute knows trading Douglas was bad in the end. But at the time he did it, it looked like our season was in the toilet. The Bills were going to be contenders and so Gute actually did Douglas a favor. Nobody knew Love was going to flip the "on" switch and do what he did.

0 points
0
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 07, 2024 at 05:41 pm

Never give up a playmaker for chicken feed.

0 points
0
0
Bitternotsour's picture

March 07, 2024 at 08:28 pm

Sorry, how did the team do after trading him? That's the true bottom line. Addition thru subtraction, plus cap relief and a third round draft choice. You guys are dying on the wrong hill.

-1 points
0
1
Matt's picture

March 09, 2024 at 04:57 pm

I agree with everything you said and I don't say I would do something different in this situation. It's easy for us to judge the past especially sitting in front of the computer not in Green Bay office. I like Gutekunst and I have high praise for his job. But the fact is, Rasul became more of a baller than he's ever been and he was always solid. With him on the roster we wouldn't be so desperate in DB area. Many people don't remember that it wasn't 3rd round pick, it was moving up from 5th and in my opinion it changes perspective. 3rd rounder for current Rasul would be something to consider but still questionable for me. The actual trade - no go. Still, we have 11 picks, gotta be optimistic.

0 points
0
0
golfpacker1's picture

March 07, 2024 at 09:27 am

I read they redid his contract, not cut him.

1 points
1
0
Starrbrite's picture

March 06, 2024 at 10:10 pm

I believe signing a legitimate FA safety such as McKinney not only adds a critical piece to the defense, but allows flexibility in the draft.
So many are sooo concerned about the cap. Relax, the cap always works itself out. Have some fun. You don’t always have to drink Folgers or Maxwell House. Try a cup of specialty coffee for a change…live a little and reject the darkness retreat.
Go Packers!!!

1 points
1
0
golfpacker1's picture

March 07, 2024 at 09:34 am

Yeah, lets blow the cap up again. The reason we have some money to spend on FAs is because we are cutting players who we paid too much in the first place, and we have the bonus of getting to keep paying them 2 years after they are gone from GB.

The cap works in the NFL, blowing all your future money and picks doesn't. Ask Denver, New Orleans, Buffalo, Chargers, and Miami how that worked out for them.

2 points
2
0
Starrbrite's picture

March 07, 2024 at 10:42 am

C’mon Golf, put your pencil down and come out of the basement for some sunshine (I’m an avid golfer by the way).
I agree, We don’t have to blow ALL the cap money on one dude—you even said you’re good with 11mil to McKinney. Justin Simmons was just released from the Broncos and maybe we can get him for 10/11 mil?
My point is, let’s find a known commodity that should immediately improve the defense and allow more flexibility in the draft.
Btw Golf, I played a few times in the World Golf Championship in Myrtle Beach. The flights are generally 50 players. I was in the top 10 a couple of times and dead last once.

0 points
0
0
cdoemel's picture

March 06, 2024 at 11:30 pm

Sorry, but this article just took too long to unfold and to get to the meat of the issue. I didn’t read it all cause it was just too many words

-1 points
0
1
TKWorldWide's picture

March 07, 2024 at 07:25 am

Will he stay healthy and dominate?
Will a bidding war result in crazy money?

1 points
1
0
jont's picture

March 07, 2024 at 09:28 am

Meanwhile it's just been reported that the Bills cut their all-pro safety Jordan Poyer. He was a cap hit at a $7.2 million salary. He's 32 years old.

What do the CHTV free agent gurus think of of this veteran for GB?

-1 points
0
1
Starrbrite's picture

March 07, 2024 at 10:46 am

I’m all for signing a FA safety; Simmons, McKinney, Poyer; any of them would help. My first choice is a trade for B. Baker.

0 points
0
0