Not to open up old wounds, but is anyone else still amazed by how well Sharper has played since the Packers dumped him? He had two more interceptions this week against the Jets and returned one 99 yards for a decisive TD early on in that game. Opening up that lead allowed them to pin their ears back and harass Sanchez the rest of the game, forcing numerous turnovers (including another pick by Sharper.)

Yeah he might not be strong in run support and still takes some funky angles at times. . . but he's a great safety and a playmaker. It makes me sick to think of how well Sharper and Collins might have been in the defensive backfield together all these years. Everyone likes to trumpet how badly TT screwed up the OLine by dumping Rivera and Wahle without adequately replaceing them, but I think that getting rid of Sharper is actually his worst GM foul-up. It really bothered me how TT came in and basically dumped him after the season he had in 2004 on an injured knee. Sharper might be a loudmouth and a hotshot, but he was also a team leader and a playmaker, and he deserved better treatment than he got.

They could have realistically extended his contract and kept him a member of the Packers instead of trying to replace him with rookies and retreads. Since the Packers cut him prior to the 2005 season, Darren Sharper has started every game (52 games), he's made 23 interceptions (including 5 in 4 games this year with the Saints) and he's scored 5 touchdowns (including 2 this season). Instead, we've had a mishmash of missed tackles, bad angles, poor decisions and just all around bad play from Mark Roman, Marquand Manuel, Atari Bigby and Aaron Rouse. Three of whom are no longer on the team and one (who I like) that can't stay healthy and likely won't be here next year. For all of his shortcomings, I think that Darren Sharper would have been even more productive in Green Bay all these years with Harris, Woodson and Collins on the field with him and Bigby backing him up. Oh well.

I always loved DS when he was with the Pack. He is a still a playmaker, but the guy is a freelancer who is out of position a lot. The Vikings were by no means so loaded at safety that they could afford to let a quality player player go. What I wonder about DS is if he will get any Hall of Fame consideration. Based on ints, tds, and tackles you could make a case. Still did he ever really feel like a dominate player? I would argue Leroy Butler was far more a force while not putting up big numbers...

Great points, Ellis.

Certainly can't dispute Sharper's production when it comes to forcing turnovers. And like you said, his replacements haven't exactly been very good (or dependable).

PET - I agree with everything that you just said, but I still hate how Ted Thompson let him go. While he's by no means perfect (and certainly not what LeRoy Butler was for the Packers), he has been far better than anyone the Packers have put out on the field opposite of Collins since 2005. There's no disputing that. I think that he would have continued to be a strong player for Green Bay if he'd been extended instead of forced to take a pay cut or hit the road. At the time, he was still a 28 year old, two-time Pro-Bowl player on a team that was changing Defensive Coordinators yet again. I understand wanting to get the cap into order at the time. . . but I didn't think then (and still don't now) that getting rid of Darren Sharper was a good move at all. He could have been kept, and I think that he should have been kept. They should have cut Roman and kept Sharper. That's my opinion. It won't change the fact that safety play has been a liability for this team since 2005. He sure doesn't seem to be freelancing too much in Gregg Williams' defense.

Yes, he still pretty "sharp".

I didn't like seeing him go and as I recall, he did great on the Vikings the year we dumped him.

We could actually use him now!!

2005 he had 9 picks and went back to the Pro Bowl. I think that he and Collins would have made a good tandem back there. I always hate "blowing up" a position and starting over when you've got at least one decent player still on the roster.

I was stunned to see in the article about his resurgence this weekend that he is only 33. Wow. I thought he was old when we dumped him. Guess not really. He could play 5 more years.

OK, the Packer "urban legend" that TT pushed Wahle and Rivera out of GB is rearing its ugly head again. Now, lets look at the facts. TT was tight against the salary cap, and Wahle was due an $11 million signing bonus. That "poison pill" was specifically added to Wahle's contract by his agent so Wahle could check out FA. It worked. Wahle simply wasn't interested in being a Packer. He was interested in maximing his portfolio.

Now, Rivera was a different story. Basically, NO ONE on this board thought Wahle was coming back. Virtually EVERYONE thought Rivera would remain loyal to the Packers. Then, the Cowboys dished out "Texas size money" (was it a $25 million offer? I seem to remember that was the figure). The Packers refused to match, and Rivera went on to an injury filled and short career in Big D (or have they renamed it "Big J", for you know who?)

Now, Sharper was someone who wanted a big payday, and TT made a financial and football decision. In hindsight, it didn't work out too well. These things happen.

I had no problem with him getting rid of either Wahle or Rivera. I said so at the time and it's still the right decision 4 years later. Many people have complained about it over the years and I was only commenting on that fact. For the record, I was disappointed that he didn't do more to replace them until the 2006 draft. There was no way that the Packers could bring the guards back based on the circumstances. . . but they could have replaced them better than they did IMO.

Darren Sharper is another story. He wasn't looking for a huge payday. He was set to count 6 million against the cap and the Packers demanded that he take a 4 million dollar pay cut or be released. All he wanted was a fair restructuring or extension that would have ended up giving the team that same amount of cap space as cutting him. If the Packers would have locked up an under 30 team leader for a fair market deal he and Collins would have been a force back there for years IMO. Ted Thompson and the Packers were wrong in how they handled it. Period. He had a down year in 2004, but he also played (and produced) through a painful knee injury and the whole defense was a mess that year. It was a bad decision in my mind, and the simple fact is that he hasn't been able to adequately fill that spot opposite Collins. He was on the roster and the Packers opted to jettison him instead of working out a way to keep him.

In 2005 6 million was a big cap number for a safety. Sharper and the Packers were a victim of Sherman's tendency to backload contracts, making it likely they would never reach the end of it.

It was, but it wouldn't have been insurmountable to reduce that number for a reasonable amount in a contract extension. That's why you write the numbers up that way. Restructure and extend. They should have extended him instead of drawing a line in the sand like they did. I'm not saying that they should have kept him at the 6 million. I think that they should have tried to work out a reasonable extension with him.