Raiderstation

No clue where to post some stuff not necessarily team related but could be? Feel free to delete if this belongs somewhere else.



Maxx and Parsons would be nasty. I probably wouldn’t pay the price though.

RI RAIDER wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 3:25 pm I know some like to use "generational talent". Micah is a generational talent and a game changer. It matters not, but I do not think I have read any publication/article/etc. where they said the Cowboys won the trade. I keep reading about his salary and the salary cap. That is like the boogie man or the Loch Ness monster (it doesn't exist). Teams always find a way to shuffle money when they need to. They were already a solid playoff team. You add Micah to the team and they will challenge the Eagles to go to the Super Bowl.

That's bc the Cowboys did not win the trade and it would be foolish to believe otherwise. Jerry may draft well but he sucks at everything else. This guy let a 4 time elite pro bowl DE leave who is the best defensive player in the game not even in his prime yet for two late 1sts and an aging defensive tackle, and sent him to his own conference. The money means absolutely nothing if the Packers win the super bowl, which they are now legit contenders.

DrDUne wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 2:57 pm

Trying to learn the offense.

I'm not convinced this changes the Packers chances a whole lot. I can see a lot of conflict and tension possible by putting more pressure on Love/offense to produce. Micah gets pissy because he/the defense are doing their job, but the offense is not. Or the defense losing games they should of won. I just think it negatively effects the symmetry of the team. Maybe if the trade had happen before training camp.

But, I've been wrong before.

RickRyb wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 3:43 pm I'm not convinced this changes the Packers chances a whole lot. I can see a lot of conflict and tension possible by putting more pressure on Love/offense to produce. Micah gets pissy because he/the defense are doing their job, but the offense is not. Or the defense losing games they should of won. I just think it negatively effects the symmetry of the team. Maybe if the trade had happen before training camp.

But, I've been wrong before.

Can it be any worse than being on the Cowboys and that cluster f[raiders_icon]ck of a team? He's got another elite rusher on the other side now too.

BoKnows81 wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 3:45 pm Can it be any worse than being on the Cowboys and that cluster fck of a team? He's got another elite rusher on the other side now too.

I'm sure Micah will be fine and continue to be great. I'm not convinced yet the Packers will be better.

RickRyb wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 3:48 pm I'm sure Micah will be fine and continue to be great. I'm not convinced yet the Packers will be better.

I'm with ya. I need to see it from Love more than anyone.

I do not know. I think folks are sleeping on the LaFleur/Love connection. The Packers HAD to make this trade (they are already a playoff team). STUPID teams who have ZERO shot of the playoffs (or even being a good team) make dumb trades like offing a 1st and a 2nd for a WR (just to keep vulva happy).

NoThanksSir wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 5:30 am I don't think a Barkley-esque year is a requirement considering Jacobs is still an upper level contributor, but I do believe they are short a handful of elite players to be considered Superbowl favorites, even with Parsons. They also have a lot of young talent playing on expiring deals, which they'll have a hard time retaining thanks to the blown cap on Parsons, or replace due to being without 1st rounders. They're moving all of their chips to the middle of the table, it'll be interesting if the cards fall in their favor.

Yeah, for sure they won't necessarily need that type of season, I kind of look at like, if JJ had gone to the eagles last year and not Barkley, do they win a SB with him instead of Barkley? My immediate reaction is no.

I'm just thinking they probably need better than what they got last year out of JJ even though it was his 2nd best year in the league, he's now a year older and they ran him 300 times. The thing with Jacobs v. Barkley is he's a 1 dimensional back, between the tackles. He's way to slow if nothing is there in the middle to start/stop change of direction HB and bounce it outside. And you can't call for a run outside as he's never had the speed to win the corner even when he first came into the league.

And now 1600 attempts later you can clearly see he's slower than he used to be. Plug up the middle and you slow/stop JJ, that's not the case with Barkley. I also agree about the rest of there team. They added some players in FA but they also lost some, including arguably there best DT on the team if not there most reliable one. Basically, they reeled in the big one with Parsons but he doesn't play quarterback. They put a lot of eggs in one basket and if somebody gets hurt not just Parsons they could be in a world of hurt.

I totally understand they want to get after the QB's in there division which makes sense. Thing is he doesn't play offense which from where I am sitting they don't seem to be loaded and/or world beaters at. Last year Bowers and Meyers had over a thousand yards receiving with our OC and Gardner Minshew and O'Connell throwing to them. Love did not look good last year despite having the #6 rusher in the league to hand off too. He was only averaging 225 per game (good for 16th in the league) and finished 19th in passing. His #1 target, Reed, finished 36th in receiving in the league. Anyway, in the end they are going to need to win a bowl for this trade to be a success. Anything less and they go back in the draft with there first pick coming towards the bottom of the 2nd round and maybe in the 60's.

NoThanksSir wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 10:29 am

I can't help but laugh when I see this (for the hundredth time or so).

Who's the coach? He's such a narcissist? Maybe I missed it but over the years every time after a game they go to Jones to interview him about the cowboys and not the coach who coaches the team. If there is a trade, Jones. Gotta be the only team in the NFL where this happens.

haji81872 wrote: Thu Aug 28, 2025 10:55 pm Does Micah know how damn cold it is up in GB? It's like they shipped him off to Siberia.

Yeah, that's a really good point. Although December is usually when it really gets cold it's still cold from about November on.

From week 9 on,
AT GB
AT GB
AT NY
AT GB
AT Lions
AT GB
AT Broncos
AT Chicago
AT GB
AT Vikings

That's 10 possible cold weather games with 2 indoor venues. Quite the change. He played the majority of his time in climate controlled stadiums now it will be the opposite. Rain, cold rain, snow, mud, wind and less then stellar playing surfaces...

https://overthecap.com/player/micah-parsons/9476
Looking at over the cap he doesnt seem to be making that much for the next 3 seasons. The packers may have pulled a fast one on Micah and will cut him before the big money kicks in.

Packers A
Dallas F

The cowgirls have entered the “Crypt Keeper” years. Something Raider Nation knows all too well. Biggest difference will be that Stephen doesn’t strike me as nearly as incompetent as Big Al’s baby boy.

Which is a shame really. Cowgirls are my least favorite team in the league. Would have been wonderful if they ended up with a Mark Davis after the sun sets on ol Jerruh.

These deals don't guarantee that any side wins. Did the Bears or Raiders win in the Mack trade?

Cowboys could have won based on they couldn't/wouldn't pay him that much and 2 firsts and a pro-bowl DT isn't bad for something you wouldn't do.

Packers could have won if Parsons makes a real difference and drives then deep into the playoffs. But they paid full comp twice for Parsons in picks and dollars.

Packers we don't know until time passes, but if there was no way the Cowboys would pay him that, then the Cowboys have already won by getting the haul they did, it could still backfire but 3 chances is better than zero.

We'll see if Parsons makes the full contact with the Packers or if they need to bail from the contract at some point.

I'm really glad the rauders extended max before the salaries went through the roof. Good job by the front office

SkullCrusher wrote: Sat Aug 30, 2025 5:45 am These deals don't guarantee that any side wins. Did the Bears or Raiders win in the Mack trade?

Cowboys could have won based on they couldn't/wouldn't pay him that much and 2 firsts and a pro-bowl DT isn't bad for something you wouldn't do.

Packers could have won if Parsons makes a real difference and drives then deep into the playoffs. But they paid full comp twice for Parsons in picks and dollars.

Packers we don't know until time passes, but if there was no way the Cowboys would pay him that, then the Cowboys have already won by getting the haul they did, it could still backfire but 3 chances is better than zero.

We'll see if Parsons makes the full contact with the Packers or if they need to bail from the contract at some point.

People are acting like Dallas needs butthole surgery after this trade, but anything could happen. I'm sure someone can tell me, but when was the last time a trade for any defensive player was the catalyst for a serious Super Bowl run?

Like you said, Mack was great but it didn't change the Bears fortunes. Maxx is great but we still suck. Etc.

A DT + two first rounders ain't bad. That's four first round picks in two years which can help Dallas trade up if e.g. a potentially great QB is there.

Keeping Parsons was the safer move, that's the only sure thing, but everything else is speculative until it isn't.