...ah, yes, the old "somebody over there is better" argument. I don't want to detail the long list of high-priced free agents who moved out of the system that they were successful in and floundered in the new system.

There is no magic bullet.

The only thing you're guaranteed is a high cap hit. I guess the Aaron Rodgers and David Bakhtiari fiascos don't matter anymore to some. Jaire is getting very close to the same territory. The new reality of high-priced free agents is they're a huge liability with limited return.

The youngest team in the league beat the Super Bowl champion and came a minute away from beating the runner up.

Fill holes first, worry about whether any game changers are available after. A hole can undo the best if signings elsewhere.

If you can find a Reggie White, it's a deal. I don't think these guarantied game changers grow on trees. A game changer on the line or at LB is as far from the LOS as you should go to be worth the big bucks in FA. Amos was a good FA but wasn't too expensive (I think).

Let's not forget that a contract for Jordan Love is looming large on the horizon. The longer his signing is delayed, the more expensive it will become.

We're finally on the precipice of getting out from under huge contracts that didn't pan out. Do we really want to jump right back into that mess? I believe 2025 would be the year to go after a significant FA signing if needed, not this year.

If cap savings from bahk and Campbell can get us Winfield and queen, without a doubt do it immediately. I still want to draft a couple safeties this year, and nubin has to be one of them. Another draftee to look at is James Williams from Mia. His size makes him a perfect fit for lb and with queen and walker in front of him he'd have time to learn.

If i may use Jaire Alxender as an example. Last year he walked away from a $700,000 bonus to spend a couple weeks in Green Bay for voluntary work outs. Clearly he isn't interested in putting the extra effort it takes winning the Super Bowl now that he's been paid. Mid level $$ for younger players still hoping to earn the big deal seems like a better option. I'm sure there are elite players who will put in the work neccessary to achieve greatness as a team but the risk vs reward considering salary cap ramifications should make it a very very rare excercise.

You have no idea who Ja is. He worked separately from the team because he works harder, and better.

So, we're now in the territory of "the Packers are only one or two players away". How to fix that problem? Pay big bucks to a FA who will come in and lead your team to glory. But for every Reggie White, there are a lot of players who just don't work out. There are multiple reasons this happens, from bad fits to the schemes, to injury and getting complacent once those huge paychecks start rolling in. Perhaps you're better off going for a mid-level player, who then exceeds expectations. Campbell and Amos come to mind immediately. Get players who fit the scheme (whatever that is going to be), are reliable and have the ability to surprise us with some special games, or even seasons.
Oh, and the person who wrote the comment about farting in your general direction? Apparently you've never seen "Monty Python and the Holy Grail". If not, find it and watch it. Hilarious, delirious, and John Cleese ad-libbed all the insults as the French knight.

I would prefer the star difference-maker at safety, but I'm not going to complain if the Packers decide to go the solid player route and not overpay. Just do something to cement the position so we're not relying on a Band-Aid (again) while D and D works its course.

Draft and develop is a great approach for building a team from the ground up, but once you announce yourself as a legitimate and durable contender, you have to take well-calculated shots once in a while for those free agents who can put you over the top. You don't abandon the D and D mindset, but you don't rely on it completely to fill glaring holes--especially with some of the project-like picks selected roughly a decade ago (I hope we've learned from that).

I totally agree that the "anything can happen in the playoffs" mentality is a faulty one. Maybe if the field of contenders isn't strong or there is no dominant team with playoff experience it's possible to go all the way, but usually you're going to have to beat the best of dethrone the champ to get it done.

Surely there is a happy medium between the Wolf and the Thompson approaches. Find it and don't be afraid to take some prudent swings.

You want to spend money- Re-sign are own.
You never break -up a Family.
And with all the positives/progress you saw last year.
Let's see what adjustments a new coach brings.
Signing NEW FAs ends the rebuild.

If there is one significant thing I can say about the NFL and the salary cap is that the highest priced free agents are just to risky to pay the price for. This is especially true for skill players where soft tissue injury has a greater likelihood to happen. So, you spend $16 Mil on a world class safety and then 2 games into the season, the hammys start up. Then he gets back and hurts his shoulder. Then ... You see my point.

I prefer the 2 good player approach just to minimize risk and have some depth. The only exception I see to this is if the team is a sure playoff spot where they are (1) REALLY SURE that 1 player will take them over the top and (2) they have the depth to back him up. I think McCaffery to SF fit that criteria. But they have some depth at RB which is good.

I would project our main dogs on defense to be:

Clark, Wynn, Slaton, Brooks, Wooden, VanNess, Gary, Walker, PSmith and McDuffie. Enagbare when he returns. So that's about 10 or 11 right there.

In the secondary, it's Alexander, Stokes, Valentine. Even if we resigned Savage and Ford, and even if we got a good draft pick at Safety, and even if we got a good CB in the draft, we'd still need Alexander and/or Stokes to stay healthy. A free agent, vet Safety wouldn't be a waste of money.

The only offensive FA I'd really be interested in is Runyan. Given that as soon as somebody gets injured, he'd be a veteran starter. He loves playing in Green Bay. Any fair contract would keep him, I think.

A year too early. Let's see what kind of defense we have. Yes, the offense played well down the stretch, but this is still a very young team. Don't over homer/hype how this year went. Next year they will be in a much better position to grab a FA or two. And they will be more experienced. Could they have made it to the SB. Sure, but they didn't.

Let's also see how this draft goes. Your take that "Might I remind everyone that the average hit rate for draft picks is around 30 percent for “major contributors.” might be true for the overall draft, but most drafts only get 1-2 or 3 if you are lucky long-term contributors anyway. And statistically they are through rounds 1-3. That's reality. How you draft in the first two rounds in key.

That said, it doesn't mean that a vet brought in is going to automatically do better than a 1st or 2nd rounder might. IMO, I'd rather take my chances with a high draft pick than an also-ran vet that a team didn't want to resign. Gute has plucked a few, but where are they now and did they get the Packers a SB win? Recently...Douglass gone. Campbell going to be. Zadarius Smith, very good for a couple, but gone. Preston Smith, solid, but not game changer. Etc., etc.

I believe this article is pretty accurate. The chart referenced below in the link is 1st round hits. It shows 60% on average historically are hits. 30% not.

How many 1st rounders are misses?
The charts below show the number of draft misses for the entire 1st round and top 10 picks (“misses” defined as a below 60th percentile player which is typically a top 55-65 player in the draft). The 1st round averages just over 11 misses and even 2018, the best year, had 8 misses.

https://phillycovercorner.com/2023/04/first-round-draft-success-rates-wh...

I like the enthusiasm, but every year, no matter how the year went, I see the "we need to bring in this FA" crowd. Hopefully the front office doesn't listen to the "Boy who yelled wolf this year."

Well, Unfortunately Ed Reed and Charles Woodson type players don't come along but every 20 years or so. I don't know of any currently. A pro Bowl type younger Vet as a FS would be a great help in the Secondary. I always thought Vikings LB was pretty special...but he is older now and on another team. A ball hawking guy with next level play anticipation who takes good pursuit angles and is a sure tackler...If we can pry one loose.

Here's my opinion on this topic:

for all the scrutiny MLF has received, I think one of his strengths is probably collaboration. He and Gutey seem out of sync on many players. Adding Hadley to the mix adds a variable, and I'm not any one of those three.

I hope they can get on the same page and function like a winning team.

GPG!

I like the approach of plugging glaring holes with value FA and also draft at those positions, trying to develop behind proven veterans. I honestly have no idea what they'll do. They hired a "cap specialist" in the 23 season, I hope that doesn't mean mortgaging the future. I think it's the wrong time for that.

My opinion (which I'm sure most will disagree with) is that I don't really care for the draft and develop for another team because they become too expensive. Also not a fan of drafting best available over needs. If Gutey is sold on a player of need who will likely be gone by his pick, trade up (Jordan Love). If players of need look like they'll be available later, AND you're not sold on those available at this pick, trade back (Wicks, Reed, Brooks). I think Gutey has improved in this area every year, with last year being outstanding.

I believe that most successful GMs uses all 3 areas to continuously improve the roster, draft, free agency, and trades.

Green Bay's needs are pretty well known. In no particular order; O-line (depth), S (cover 1 starter), CB (starter and/or depth), and ILB (starter and depth). The one area that I don't see talked about much is a stud pass rushing DE/OLB (the 1 position I'd sell the farm for if possible). There's also the issues of whether Dillon can be signed affordably, and an eventual replacement for Jones.

The Packers can fill some of those holes in the draft. It's a fairly strong class for S, CB, O-line, and DE. There's also a few good looking RBs. The class is quite weak for ILB. There's only so many picks with diminishing returns as rounds progress (there are exceptions but not often). I'd love to see a trade or 2 to help fill some of these holes, as well as a possible free agent or 2. Depending solely on the draft this year doesn't look promising. We were very close this year and identified some strengths. No avoiding that next year will be a very different team, with hopefully vastly improved D. Go Pack go!

Buying a difference-maker in free agency certainly can make sense. OTOH, if the FA is the best at his position, there isn't much surplus value available, only even or downside. OTOH, difference-makers help make super bowl winners. Reggie White eventually helped make the defense dominant. Then, the other shoe dropped when Brett Favre became elite.

Fans make fun of the Bears for signing Khalil Mack. But that move did exactly what the GM intended: it made the Bears defense dominant. The problem was the other shoe never dropped. Trubisky remained Trubisky, leading to an anemic offense. True, the Bears used both money and draft capital whereas White cost only money.

You've got a lot of debt on your credit card so what do you do ? You do not book an expensive cruise and push even more debt forward. That way leads to madness, monstrous dead-money burdens.

What you DO do is tighten the belt, make the odd, cheap veteran signing, to plug the most glaring holes in the roster before the draft. You try your damndest to hit on your 5 day 1 & 2 picks in the draft, because that is the cheapest way to restock and improve your team.

Bigger trade deals or high-priced veterans can be chased after when your cap is back to relative health.

Every year without fail I see people who want a big splash spending assert that "This year is different, this is the year to spend big and damn the future". This year is not that year and it hardly ever is, in any year. The more you succeed in the draft, the less need you have of bringing in outsiders...............and Gute has had two outstanding years of drafting in 2022 and 2023.

Plug the worst holes with a budget guy or two and then use all those day 1 and 2 picks for your main attack to improve your roster.

Im not against spending in free agency but I dont think it absolutely has to be a star. Imho, the goal of free agency should be simplified to trying to fix a weakness. Right now, the biggest weakness on this team is the lack of toughness and/or tackling ability on the defense. Add a player or players who address this weakness and Im happy. If its a superstar, even better. Just get better.