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....

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.

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!!!!

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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.

Duplicate

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-

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.

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

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?

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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???

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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.