Packers ideally positioned to make a run at Khalil Mack if h

Geregistreerd op: 09 Nov 2018 Berichten: 232

It’s the kind of move that can only reasonably happen in Madden. The team with the best offensive player in the league trades for arguably the best defensive player. Even the most deranged fans generally shy away from calling up their local radio station or podcast host to insist their team make a move like the one being discussed among Packers Nation right now:Trade for Khalil Mack. Unwilling to play the last year of his deal at his current price Green Bay Packers Hats , the 2016 Defensive Player of the Year hasn’t practiced with the Raiders in training camp and has no plans to do so. Reports have Mack’s camp at odds with Oakland management to the point they’re not even actively involved in negotiations. As this fight grows bitter, conversations have bubbled up about a potential trade. Over the weekend, OddSharks posted odds on where Mack would be playing by mid-fall and the Packers had better odds than the Raiders — in fact, they had better odds than all 31 other NFL teams. Brian Gutekunst made a joke about calling Reggie McKenzie in a press conference last week that didn’t outright dismiss questions about whether Green Bay might be interested. But let’s, for the moment, set aside whether it’s at all likely Oakland ends up trading the best player on their team (doubtful) and narrow the focus to whether or not it makes sense for the Packers. Here’s the short answer: absolutely. The starting point of any deal, before compensation or a new contract, would be would Mack report to camp without a new contract? Green Bay’s road splits into two camps depending on the answer, but Mack has to want to play for the Packers at least in 2018 before any deal can be struck. Compensation flows from his willingness to talk deal. Gutekunst would likely be more willing to part with major assets if the precondition for any trade involved a negotiated extension. That kind of clarity with the financial future would be worth more to the Packers. If Mack is simply willing to attend training camp and play in 2018 — no deal but at least he’ll play (and we assume the Raiders will willingly trade him in this scenario) — that should be enough for Gutekunst to pull the trigger. No new contract needs to be negotiated ahead of time. If he’ll come to camp and play in 2018, help the Packers compete for a Super Bowl, that’s worth what it would likely cost to get him. What would it take? There’s no recent precedent to rely on here. To find a defensive star traded in his prime, we have to go back to 2004 to the Clinton Portis-Champ Bailey deal in which the Broncos actually sent an additional pick with Bailey to get Portis.The league was wildly different then, with the value of running backs out of wack with where the game is in 2018. That kind of deal would never happen in today’s league. That said, it took a superstar player (at the time) to make that deal happen. Oakland wouldn’t give up Mack for a first-round pick at least. The question becomes how much more will it take? Brandin Cooks went for a first (twice). Likewise for Percy Harvin. Mack presents considerably more impact in a vacuum, but his contract situation looms over all of this. That may actually make a trade more intuitive from Green Bay’s standpoint. One of the ways the Packers could fit Mack’s eventual mega-deal under the cap would be to let Clay Matthews walk at the end of the 2018 season when his contract expires. Ditto for Randall Cobb. Combined, those two players leaving wipes $24 million off the books for 2019. Justin Houston holds the biggest cap number of any pass rusher in football right now at $20.6 million for 2018. Simply washing their hands of those contracts more than frees up enough space to sign Mack. Instead of allowing Matthews to leave in free agency, why not just deal him now? Jon Gruden clearly loves established veterans and already spent on bringing in a past-his-prime former Packer. How about a first plus Matthews (the Raiders can sell it as still wanting to compete) plus another pick, let’s call it a fourth that can turn into a third if Mack plays 16 games?That would be well worth the risk even if Mack isn’t signed to a contract outright as part of the deal (Remember Green Bay Packers Hoodie , the baseline here is assuming Mack will come play in Green Bay for the one season on his deal). It’s the chance to go win a Super Bowl with the best offensive-defensive 1-2 punch in the league since Favre-White for a first and a mid-round pick. Plus the Packers would still keep one of their firsts, whether it’s their own or the Saints pick, so they’re not having to mortgage their short-term future for short-term gain. Theoretically, a Super Bowl run and the biggest contract in football for a defender would assuage any fears Mack would have about playing in Green Bay. On the other hand, Mack is from a small town in Florida and played in Buffalo and may not shy away from the quaint (by NFL standards) feel of the NFL’s tiniest market. Rodgers proves it’s easy enough to be a star there. Whether or not Reggie McKenzie or Jon Gruden would actually be willing to pull the trigger on any deal for their star defender doesn’t feel like much of a debate. Cooler heads will likely prevail and the potential loss of money for Mack sitting out actual games should spur a deal. But Gruden may just be zany enough to push this to the bring, doing irreparable damage to the relationship with their star. If it gets to that point, Gutekunst should stick to his word that they would be in every discussion for available players. Green Bay would be uniquely positioned both financially and from a trade capital perspective to pull the trigger on a blockbuster. Trading a beloved star and a future pick for a possible one-year rental may seem like a lot, but when weighed against the possibility of winning a Super Bowl feels like a reasonable price to pay.What if Mike McCarthy actually gave up control of the Packers’ offense? When Mike McCarthy abdicated playcalling duties for the Green Bay Packers in 2015, he clearly recognized the need for him to be able to make important in-game decisions without the clutter of playcalling questions looming over him. The collapse in the NFC Championship Game against Seattle towered over this decision. It’s hard enough to make the right call to go for it on fourth down without having to also think “What play are we going to pick?”Instead, the Packers lost Jordy Nelson, Davante Adams struggled with injuries, Eddie Lacy battled his weight, and Aaron Rodgers appeared to lose faith in his supporting cast, coaches included. The offense never got on track, even once McCarthy re-took control of playcalling. Fast forward to 2018 when the offense once again looks disjointed, the two-time MVP quarterback looks jumpy and unsure anyone will do his job around him, and although the scheme has improved, the offense itself regressed from an execution standpoint.Maybe the problem is they’re still running McCarthy’s offense Customized Green Bay Packers Jerseys , one behind the NFL times in terms of creativity and ease of operation. Plenty of other teams have found ways to integrate rookies or play backup quarterbacks. They’ve deployed personnel much less talented than the running backs the Packers have to greater efficiency and success. The question could certainly be raised that if McCarthy isn’t here for his offense, why is he here at all? That’s a reasonable take to have, but let’s set it aside for a moment. McCarthy, as a tone-setter and culture leader, has always displayed the kind of toughness and commitment to fundamentals ingrained in the history of the Packers. He’s a quintessential Packers coach. He’s well liked by Mark Murphy and for whatever can be said about his failings, McCarthy is, as he says, a highly successful football coach. So let’s assume Murphy wants to give McCarthy a chance to turn this offense around in 2019. What that likely also assumes is the offense gets back on track far enough to get this team back into the playoffs, win a game or two, but ultimately come up short of the Super Bowl. This could be enough to save McCarthy’s job outright, but not go so far as to insulate him from a directive from the front office to make changes. Is this situation even workable? That depends on who the Packers bring in to run the offense. One would have to imagine McCarthy would still want to run some variation of the West Coast principles, which doesn’t close the pool of potential candidates too far. Much of the league still relies on core West Coast concepts even if Mike Holmgren disciples like Andy Reid have incorporated a ton of new, spread schemes from the college game. The hot offensive names likely won’t settle for OC jobs, which rules out guys like Lincoln Riley and John DeFilippo — though both would be desirable head coaching candidates if Green Bay needs one this offseason. When the Buccaneers complete their predictable collapse this season, expect everyone to be looking for work. That would include Todd Monken, who brought deep shots for days to the Bucs offense. But his approach could veer too far afield (no pun intended) from how McCarthy wants to play, though Rodgers would probably love to chuck it deep 10 times a game. Joe Moorehead would be an intriguing options in a vacuum, but he just signed as head coach at Mississippi State. Lane Kiffin probably has no realistic shot to coach in the NFL until at least 2020. Todd Downing www.authenticsgreenbaypackers.com , a Vikings offensive assistant, presents an intuitive fit. The 38-year-old coached Matthew Stafford in Detroit and Derek Carr in Oakland before joining the Vikings staff this past offseason and has shown himself to be an adaptive offensive mind, coaching in multiple types of offensive systems. The Vikings run their own version of the modern West Coast offense under DeFilippo, a perfect coach under whom Downing can learn. Rodgers would likely play well with the shared concepts, which would include more deep shot openings as well as schemed underneath route combinations. The cliche route is to pick a position coach from the one of the best offenses in the league, but if there’s a dark-horse candidate out there, it’s Rams quarterbacks coach Zac Taylor. The 35-year-old now works under Sean McVay, the most creative offensive mind in football, but previously coached quarterbacks under Joe Philbin in Miami and was an offensive graduate assistant under Mike Sherman at Texas A&M. If any young coach has the right blend of experience in the Packers current system but also exposure to a more innovative approach, it’s Taylor. How would Rodgers respond to a coach running the offense who is only a year older than he is? The Packers could have the same problem with a new head coach as well. The hope would be the improved offensive approach would help Rodgers play more often within the structure of the offense. Even if the schemes, terminology, and concepts didn’t change that much, just having a new voice in the room could turn the tide for this offense from an attitude standpoint. Rodgers appears frustrated with stale concepts and it’s possible McCarthy’s voice has grown tired. If that’s the case, the better course of action would likely just be to find a new voice altogether for the locker room. That said, such a drastic change in the tail end of Rodgers’ prime may be unpalatable for Murphy and the Packers brass. Half-measures rarely work in the NFL, but given the circumstances, keeping McCarthy in charge of the team but insisting he turn over the offense may be just the kind of injection of life this team needs.