Packers Free Agency: Who Might Return In 2013?

When the Green Bay Packers have let a player become an unrestricted free agent in recent years, it's a pretty good sign that they don't intend to bring him back. One recent exception was LB Erik Walden, who re-signed last year for near the veteran's minimum, but he might have hurt more than he helped last season.

For those who've asked, here's the list of #Packers unrestricted and restricted free agents: sulia.com/c/green-bay-pa…
— Jason Wilde (@jasonjwilde) February 14, 2013

RB Cedric Benson, RB Ryan Grant, WR Greg Jennings, ILB Brad Jones, and OLB Erik Walden are all unrestricted free agents.

TE Tom Crabtree, C Evan Dietrich-Smith, ILB Rob Francois, CB Sam Shields, and OLB Frank Zombo are all restricted free agents. Since the restricted free agent market is for all practical purposes extinct, those players aren't going anywhere. They will sign modest one-year contracts to return, unless the Packers decide they don't want them back at any price. I'd expect them all to return for the start of training camp.

Do you see the Packers re-signing any of their unrestricted free agents?

They might wait until April, but they could re-sign Cedric Benson. They were pretty happy with his style of running before his season ending foot injury, and if he can pass a physical, he might return as the veteran alternative to RB DuJuan Harris or any back they add in the draft.

Jennings will probably be too expensive, despite what these former GMs think, because there are some teams with money to spend. All it takes is one serious suitor for Jennings to become too expensive.

Both Grant and Walden were allowed to leave last year and only played roles with the team because of injuries. I don't think the Packers will bring them back to do the same thing in 2013.

The Packers would probably like Brad Jones to return, but after a year of starting at inside linebacker, he might look for a starting job elsewhere. He might even find some team willing to let him start and pay him a couple million per year over the next few years. That's not a lot of money, but the Packers would only use him as a special teams player and backup linebacker, so a couple million is too much to pay him.

In the end, the Packers probably won't re-sign any unrestricted free agents before March, but they could return later in the month.

Preview: Lions at Packers On Sunday Night

At first glance, this injury report looks bad. On the other hand, the Green Bay Packers are almost in the same situation they were when they last faced the Lions back on November 18.

#Packers practice report: Lang returned but no Matthews, Nelson, Neal, Wilson, Starks
— Wes Hodkiewicz (@WesHod) December 7, 2012

Having RT T.J. Lang would be a big help, and it looks like he'll play. It's always a concern when LB Clay Matthews is out, but the defense put a lot of pressure on QB Matthew Stafford in their last meeting (5 sacks, 2 INTs, 1 fumble) without him. WR Jordy Nelson had a quiet day (3 catches for 45 yards) during their last meeting, and his loss is offset by the return of WR Greg Jennings. RB James Starks is replaced by RB Ryan Grant, which is arguably an upgrade. Losing DE Mike Neal and DE C.J. Wilson will stretch their depth, but I expect the Packers will spend most of the time in their two lineman, nickel package, so D-line depth won't be as important.

Though the Lions haven't won at Lambeau since QB Aaron Rodgers was in elementary school, I'm worried about this game. In their last meeting, the Lions turned the ball over four times and the Packers' offense only managed to score 17 points. While not much has changed on offense since that meeting (assuming Lang starts), 17 points is not enough if the Lions can avoid the turnovers.

However, the Lions' offense has since taken a step back. On November 18th, the Lions' second leading receiver was WR Ryan Broyles, who's now out for the year with an ACL injury, and their third leading receiver, WR Titus Young, is out for the year because he's a complete headcase. Though that's an addition by subtraction because Young was in open rebellion against the Lions and ended up helping the Packers more than hurting them. Still, the loss of Broyles, combined with the earlier loss of WR Nate Burleson, has to be a problem.

The Lions haven't scored under 20 points in their last six games, so assuming they don't commit four turnovers again, they should still manage around 24 points. The Packers, on the other hand, haven't scored over 24 points in their last three games, but they did have 31 points against a very good Cardinals defense back on November 4th. In that game, Rodgers threw for four touchdowns and he'll have to make plays like that again for them to win next Sunday.

Packers 31, Lions 24.

The Packers Bring Back Ryan Grant

Another injury, this time to the knee of RB James Starks, has forced another roster move, and this time, the Green Bay Packers have brought back a familiar face.

Packers announced they signed RB Ryan Grant and placed RB Johnny White (concussion) on injured reserve.
— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) December 5, 2012

RB Johnny White has been out of action since he suffered a concussion against the Giants so technically he's lost his roster spot to Grant, though Starks' knee injury is reportedly season-ending. Maybe they still have some hope that Starks can return this season.

The Packers didn't re-sign Grant after last season, despite the fact that he was their best running back according to Football Outsiders. That's faint praise, Grant was ranked 28th while Starks was ranked 39th, and it skimmed over the fact that Grant was basically useless for most of the season. In their first 11 games, he ran for over 40 yards on only one occasion: against the Bears in Week 3.

But he did finish the season strong. Over his last four games, he ran for 85, 66, 44, and 48 yards. Plus, he had a big 80 yard touchdown reception against the Lions. It makes sense that it would take some time for him to get back to full strength because he missed nearly the entire 2010 season.

It's also understandable that the Packers didn't re-sign him. His best days are behind him and GM Ted Thompson doesn't fill his roster with aging, mediocre veterans. He wants to bring in some young, cheap players, and see if the coaches can turn them into something.

However, at this point, with RB Cedric Benson out for the year (and Starks not too far behind), the Packers need help now. They'll reevaluate the position before next year's draft. In the meantime, the Packers could really use a healthy, mediocre veteran running back who knows their offense.

The Packers Defend The Signing of Cedric Benson

Sure RB Cedric Benson was completely unwanted by any team, and he signed with the Green Bay Packers at the minimum salary with no signing bonus, only after four of their five running backs were either injured or limited due to prior injuries, but GM Ted Thompson said "We liked what we saw with Cedric."

He's talking about him as a player he wanted, not a player he was forced to sign, and he probably could have re-signed RB Ryan Grant instead. He's made his choice, one that could turn out to the wrong choice based on Benson's decline over the past two seasons, and he's sticking with it.

I have to admit, while I was cool on the idea at first, I'm warming up to him. Statistically, re-signing Grant looked like the better move, but with all the injuries (and the inexperience in the Packers's backfield), I'm glad to see a veteran back on the roster. The addition of Benson reminds me of when they re-signed Ahman Green back in 2009.

Just like Benson, the Packers brought Green in for a try out and thought he could still play. They were right; Green ran for 3.9 ypc that season. That's hardly elite, but it's good enough to deserve a roster spot. He also added some veteran stability when the Packers seemed to need it in the backfield, and they seem to need it again now. Also, if Benson does end up starting and he manages to deliver a big run or two, he could give opposing defenses something else to worry about.

Benson will also have the advantage of playing behind the first offensive line, whenever he finally gets on the field, because starting LT Marshall Newhouse has returned from his concussion. Depth is still a concern until Derek Sherrod returns to practice, but he will return at some point this season and it's possible that Andrew Datko can improve over the course of the preseason. Also, I liked what I saw from undrafted rookie Don Barclay at left guard during the first preseason game against the Chargers. That's not outstanding depth, but it should be good enough.

There was a rumor that Chad Clifton might take a physical for the Patriots, who have their own injury problems on the offensive line, but that turned out to be false. If he is able to return, I'd hope he come back to Green Bay.

Should The Packers Sign Cedric Benson

Simple answers to simple questions: No. But the Green Bay Packers might sign RB Cedric Benson anyway, as was reported by Ian Rapoport at NFL.com, and they (hopefully) have a good reason.

While I don't believe this line of thinking, here's why he could be a good signing. I questioned last week whether James Starks was really the answer, and pointed out that there isn't a strong Plan B on the roster. Cedric Benson has shown great athleticism and production in the past, and a strong work out could be a sign that he still has some game left in him. After weak performances by Starks (5 carries for 16 yards) and undrafted rookie Marc Tyler (13 carries for 32 yards) in their opening preseason game, they understandably might want an upgrade.

On the other hand, there are many reasons why he's not the answer. He has rushed for over 1000 yards each of the last three seasons, but he's done it while averaging under 4 yards per carry. Football Outsiders had him ranked near the bottom of the pack last season for good reason: his low ypc and his tendency to fumble. I double-checked their section on him in the 2012 Football Outsiders Almanac, and there's nothing positive to recommend him there either.

Other red flags abound, he's frequently in trouble with police and he's on the wrong side of age 30, but his fumbles, on a team that prides themselves on winning the turnover battle, is my biggest concern. However, he might not be given more than 150 carries even under the best of circumstances, which would only add one or two more fumbles (potentially) over the course of the season.

It's disappointing to see his signing receive serious consideration, they should have planned this better during the offseason, but his arrival wouldn't have a major impact one way or another.

Where In The World Is Ryan Grant?

I'm a little disappointed the Green Bay Packers didn't make an effort to re-sign RB Ryan Grant. I'm not exactly inspired by a group of running backs led by an oft-injured back (James Starks), another coming off a major knee injury (Alex Green), and a bunch of undrafted players (Du'ane Bennett, Brandon Saine, and Marc Tyler). However, that might be good enough for an offense that doesn't rely on the running game.

There's also some comfort in the fact that John Kuhn is still around if an emergency strikes. But Grant could have provided something none of them could: a back who can still play and was playing at an elite level as recently as 2009. Also, he did finish strong last season.
Grant's agent says that he's made visits and received multiple offers, but "the deals haven't been right." I'm sure that's why the Packers aren't paying him anymore. With the exception of Donald Driver, the Packers don't pay for veteran backups who aren't contributing on special teams. And even Driver is arguably a valuable special teams performer for when they need him to play on the hands team during an onside kick.

Grant was OK last season, ranked No. 27 overall by Football Outsiders, but the guy ranked ahead of him at No. 26, Raiders RB Michael Bush, just received a four-year, $3 million per season, $7 million guaranteed contract from the Bears. I think the Bears overpaid for a backup RB, that's starter's money, but Grant is arguably Bush without as many attempts. It's reasonable for him to believe that he should be paid the same.

But Grant is two years older and there's only one Bears team out there will to overpay for a backup RB. No one is obviously viewing either player as a starter, or they'd be starting for that hypothetical team. Hopefully his agent isn't waiting for just the right opportunity and a contract in the $2 to 3 million range because I don't think it exists. There will be an injury or two during the preseason, there always is, but that doesn't mean that team will consider Grant as an option.

It would really be a shame if he doesn't play next season because he should still be playing football. He's still a good backup, and he'd be a better replacement starter than many backups on other teams. While he's never done much on special teams with the Packers, back when he was with the Giants, he was great at playing on the scout team and pretending to be the opponent's starting running back. That's probably not worth $3 million, but that should be worth something to many teams.