Jump to content

Broncos hire Packers OC Nathaniel Hackett as HC


Rhg1084
 Share

Recommended Posts

I honestly think this is a great hire.  The Broncos are pretty stacked and really just need a leader with a true threat at QB.  And if they dont, Nate Hackett took Blake Bortles and the Jacksonville Jaguars to the AFC Champ game and they were 5th in the league in scoring.  And let's be real, they were robbed by this sh*tty ass rigged league because everyone and their mother knows, Miles Jack was not down, and they should have been in the Super Bowl. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, nycdan said:

...and the NFL begins turning into the NBA before our very eyes.

Brady proved it can work by leaving NE where they weren't investing in offensive weapons and moving to TB where they already had some and would add some more. I don't see why Rodgers couldn't do the same in Denver - especially if he had Adams going with him.

Don't blame top QB's for wanting to go somewhere where they can get some weapons to work with. GB's salary cap is F'd.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Larz said:

Rodgers and Adams ?

I doubt it for a few reason.

1- they already have plenty of receivers.  They would have to trade Sutton or Jeudy to make room for Adams.

2- They probably dont have the cap space to pay rodgers and make adams the highest paid receiver in the league.

3- Why would GB let Adams walk for nothing?  I assume they will franchise him if he wont sign with them.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Joe W. Namath said:

I doubt it for a few reason.

1- they already have plenty of receivers.  They would have to trade Sutton or Jeudy to make room for Adams.

2- They probably dont have the cap space to pay rodgers and make adams the highest paid receiver in the league.

3- Why would GB let Adams walk for nothing?  I assume they will franchise him if he wont sign with them.

You partially answered your own question.  DEN would probably have to include Sutton in any deal for Rodgers (saves them $8.4M in cap while Jeudy would cost them).  Also, they are sitting on $40M of cap room before even making cuts, trades, or restructuring. 

Still a lot of complexity to this still, but it does track.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rhg1084 said:
Hopefully Hackett is a better HC than is father was as an OC. Truly one of the worst OC in Jets history!

Coming to the Jets has a tendency to ruin careers. 

Pre Jets, his Dad was an ok OC producing ok Offenses for KC.

In five seasons in KC he OC'd 3 top-10 Offenses, a 13th and a 19th, under Marty, with end-era Montana, Steve Bono and Elvis Grbac/mid-era Rich Gannon  (Pre-his OAK breakout years) in his final year.

Nothing to write home about per se, but moderately successful.

Once he got here, he (and our Offense) was mostly trash in terms of production.  His years being the early Chad/end-Vinny seasons, where most years you got a bit of both due to injury and whathaveyou.

Being the Jets OC has not been a route to fame the past 30 years or so (or ever, really).  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, nycdan said:

You partially answered your own question.  DEN would probably have to include Sutton in any deal for Rodgers (saves them $8.4M in cap while Jeudy would cost them).  Also, they are sitting on $40M of cap room before even making cuts, trades, or restructuring. 

Still a lot of complexity to this still, but it does track.

Thats right, I forgot that Rodgers needs to be traded.  Pack might not want sutton though and rather have draft picks.

If they put Juedy on the market that is a guy Joe Douglas would be interested in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Barry McCockinner said:

Brady proved it can work by leaving NE where they weren't investing in offensive weapons and moving to TB where they already had some and would add some more. I don't see why Rodgers couldn't do the same in Denver - especially if he had Adams going with him.

Don't blame top QB's for wanting to go somewhere where they can get some weapons to work with. GB's salary cap is F'd.

Adams = Franchise Tag??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Joe W. Namath said:

I doubt it for a few reason.

1- they already have plenty of receivers.  They would have to trade Sutton or Jeudy to make room for Adams.

2- They probably dont have the cap space to pay rodgers and make adams the highest paid receiver in the league.

3- Why would GB let Adams walk for nothing?  I assume they will franchise him if he wont sign with them.

How does GB tag Adams? They're over 40 million over the cap already.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, greenwichjetfan said:

Man what is it about Denver?

They’re already gotten SB titles out of two all time greats that they didn’t draft (Elway and Peyton). They gonna strike gold again for a third time with Rodgers?

The difference is Rodgers comes up small in the playoffs. He should have won the last 2 years with the better team and home field advantage and he couldn’t finish one big drive to get them over the top. He also turns 39 and everyone not named Brady starts to decline at that age. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

My understanding is that GB is required to follow the salary cap rules like all the other teams, but maybe not.

If Rodgers and his $35 mil has moved on to Denver.... no reason they would let the best WR in the league go as well.... especially without getting draft compensation for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, 32EBoozer said:

If Rodgers and his $35 mil has moved on to Denver.... no reason they would let the best WR in the league go as well.... especially without getting draft compensation for him.

If they trade him post June 6 they get to about 12 million over the cap with 40 guys under contract. Pre-June 6 and it's over 20 million over. I'm guessing potential trade partners would want to make that happen pre-draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

My understanding is that GB is required to follow the salary cap rules like all the other teams, but maybe not.

If the rollover on OTC is correct there is an interesting scenario that may play out.

The Packers can make enough room to tag Adams but for that to happen they would need to trade Aaron first. Basically the Broncos can wait it out sign Adams and then Roders signs off on a trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nycdan said:

I don't blame the players.  I just hate the end of the path it leads to.  There are reasons why it's harder to do in the NFL, but I imagine those might erode over time and as the new CBA gets negotiated.  I really would hate to see that kind of star player movement in the NFL every year though.  I think it really hurts the sport. 

 

The only winners along with a handful of franchises with star QBS are the team owners.

The game is now so slanted to the quality of QB a team has, there are really only 6 or 7 teams that have a legitimate shot to get through the playoffs and win the super bowl.  There are two or three young qbs who have an outside shot of joining that group. 

The only outlier I see is San Francisco, because of team talent and coaching. But the stars have to align weird, a Blood Moon, for Jimmy Garrapolo to win it all. I don't see it.

Unless top qbs change team its going to be the same teams winning Super Bowls. Tampa Bay was going nowhere despite all the talent, until Boy Wonder showed up.

For example, I don't care who is coaching the Giants,  Daniel Jones has no shot at winning a Super Bowl. It's too early to tell with the Jets...

How much fun is the NFL for fans if they know that for the foreseeable future their team is not going to win a Super Bowl unless they hit the QB jackpot lottery years from now?

This rule even goes for good qbs on good NFL teams.

Playoffs? Sure, but good is no longer good enough to win a Super Bowl.

Even teams like the Raiders who have a good QB have no realistic shot at winning it all.

Ryan Tannehill and the Titans? No 1 seed in the AFC, no shot.

Dallas and Dak Prescott, a very good team but no shot.

The Colts with Carson Wentz, no shot.

The Patriots with Mac Jones no shot.

This list goes on and on..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

If they trade him post June 6 they get to about 12 million over the cap with 40 guys under contract. Pre-June 6 and it's over 20 million over. I'm guessing potential trade partners would want to make that happen pre-draft.

When do teams have to be under the cap by? Maybe they could designate it a June 1st trasaction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bla bla bla said:

If the rollover on OTC is correct there is an interesting scenario that may play out.

The Packers can make enough room to tag Adams but for that to happen they would need to trade Aaron first. Basically the Broncos can wait it out sign Adams and then Roders signs off on a trade.

how many guys under contract in that scenario? They're currently set at only 41 guys under contract and over 40 million over the cap. They can cut & trade guys but they still have to fill out the roster. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Gangrene said:

The only winners along with a handful of franchises with star QBS are the team owners.

The game is now so slanted to the quality of QB a team has, there are really only 6 or 7 teams that have a legitimate shot to get through the playoffs and win the super bowl.  There are two or three young qbs who have an outside shot of joining that group. 

The only outlier I see is San Francisco, because of team talent and coaching. But the stars have to align weird, a Blood Moon, for Jimmy Garrapolo to win it all. I don't see it.

Unless top qbs change team its going to be the same teams winning Super Bowls. Tampa Bay was going nowhere despite all the talent, until Boy Wonder showed up.

For example, I don't care who is coaching the Giants,  Daniel Jones has no shot at winning a Super Bowl. It's too early to tell with the Jets...

How much fun is the NFL for fans if they know that for the foreseeable future their team is not going to win a Super Bowl unless they hit the QB jackpot lottery years from now?

This rule even goes for good qbs on good NFL teams.

Playoffs? Sure, but good is no longer good enough to win a Super Bowl.

Even team like the Raiders who have a good QB have no realistic shot at winning it all.

Ryan Tannehill and the Titans? No 1 seed in the AFC, no shot.

Dallas and Dak Prescott, a very good team but no shot.

The Colts with Carson Wentz, no shot.

The Patriots with Mac Jones no shot.

This list goes on and on..

Other than Brady who are these perennial star QB winners you speak of? Mahomes got his ass kicked last year. Allen hasn't won anything. Rodgers has one ring. C'mon man!

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...