Should the Packers Have Re-Signed Micah Hyde?
In the wake of the Packers defense struggling to improve this season despite an infusion of new talent, it’s unsurprising to see second guessing abound.
Maybe Green Bay should have brought Micah Hyde back, regardless of the cost? Today, Hyde was recognized as October’s AFC Defensive Player of the Month thanks to four interceptions as Buffalo went 3-1 in the month.
At the time when he signed a five year, $30 million ($14 million guaranteed) contract with the Bills, my colleague Jon Meerdink wrote this:
If possible, should the Packers have matched this contract?
In an ideal world, the Packers would have been able to keep Hyde, but from the Packers perspective, there’s probably not much reason to match Hyde’s deal. The Bills are paying Hyde like a starting caliber safety, and an elite one at that. Hyde is neither of those things. Seeing what Buffalo ponied up, the Packers should feel good about not matching their numbers.
While Hyde would be a nice luxury to have given Morgan Burnett’s injury, the Packers had the benefit of playing with Hyde when Burnett was out of the lineup previously. The defense still looked lost without the veteran safety making the calls and getting everyone lined up.
If you’re angry that Micah Hyde is having success with the Bills, then I would argue you should also be upset that no one in the Packers defense can understand and organize the players on the field to the level Burnett does.
For beating the “next man up” drum for seven years since the Super Bowl XLV run, the Packers actions look like “next man up, unless it’s Burnett” on defense.
Before the pitchforks and torches descend on Lambeau Field for letting Hyde get away, allow the defensive back to play out the duration of his five year pact. As unsatisfying of an answer as that is, only then will we be able to assess whether it truly was in Green Bay’s best interest to keep Hyde.