Gute presser

[RashanGary]

Drug dealers sell drugs because there is a demand for them. Drug dealers by selling drugs cause a lot of pain in peoples lives and you certainly can argue the morality of selling drugs.

Drug dealers sell drugs because there is a demand is 100% equal to low denominator journalism selling clicks on creepy content because of demand. It’s the same reason both happen. Demand. The demand is a constant between the two. That’s not equating severity. Just the demand aspect.

Drug dealers cause harm in a way that law enforcement and the judicial system punish rather than excuse

My stance is that creepy journalism causes harm to other people in a way that the public and anyone with a large platform has every right to drag them through the mud rather than excuse them and let them have free reign on public opinion.

Same supply and demand. Different levels of harm so different levels of consequences. But just excusing it because they want money is kind of silly. Let these coaches, players and GMs call them out so we all know what dirt bags they are.

[Frozen Tundra]

HOW exactly does the TEAM need those media assholes? HOW are you claiming the team would suffer? I can see arguing that the fans need facts/real information, not fake news masquerading as facts, but even that is a big nothing for the team. The only thing really needed is the directly quoted words and finished actions of the coach and GM and maybe occasionally players. Beyond that, hell no.

You should tell the NFL that. They'll be grateful to learn that they no longer need to piss away hundreds of millions of dollars a year on publicity and media representation.

https://www.campaignlive.com/article...ccount/1807853

[RashanGary]

It’s like awe shucks, reporter A lied and caused all sorts of problems for Player B. He’s just trying to get clicks. It’s really your fault for reading it. Don’t ever correct the lie or call him out because he just wanted money and there should be no consequences to his behavior if the reason he did it was wanting more money. The problem is you clicking on it, not him using a huge platform to spread lies.

[run pMc]

It’s like awe shucks, reporter A lied and caused all sorts of problems for Player B. He’s just trying to get clicks. It’s really your fault for reading it. Don’t ever correct the lie or call him out because he just wanted money and there should be no consequences to his behavior if the reason he did it was wanting more money. The problem is you clicking on it, not him using a huge platform to spread lies.

Responsible media institutions such as most newspapers like the NYT or JSO actually have a corrections section. Websites will indicate if they made a correction to the original story at the bottom. If you're consuming your news from questionable media sources, fan blogs, and rumor mills like X you are going to a back alley vs. a pharmacy.

And players do plenty to mislead reporters. Witness the Jaire "thanks for supporting me" tweets. It's the highest paid CB in the NFL posting something, it's going to get coverage.

I'll say it again, the majority of the factual news you consume is from media, directly or indirectly. Think about how you would learn anything about GB without radio, newpaper, or internet coverage for a moment. If you hate it and think it's harmful, don't consume it and just wander in the dark until the games are televised.

[texaspackerbacker]

It’s like awe shucks, reporter A lied and caused all sorts of problems for Player B. He’s just trying to get clicks. It’s really your fault for reading it. Don’t ever correct the lie or call him out because he just wanted money and there should be no consequences to his behavior if the reason he did it was wanting more money. The problem is you clicking on it, not him using a huge platform to spread lies.

Yeah, and I think a lot of times, it's intentional just to stir up trouble.

That "correction section" is generally a lot less visible and obvious as the original bullshit.

And those two examples run pMc gave hardly deserve to be called "responsible". They are just members of the fake news media.

[bobblehead]

Guter seems interested in adding a FA but running back does not seem like the right position for that.

You all miss a simple point. Gutes doesn't have to pay a RB 12 million a season. There are solid backs out there who won't get paid too much. Guys like Myles Sanders or Devin Singletary. Give them a good OL and opportunities and they can produce. We can sign one and draft one and bring one in undrafted and likely have 3 good RB to pair with Jones.

[bobblehead]

Um drugs are potentially fatal. A news story isn't.
Reminder: 95% of the information you get about the Packers is from a news source. The same could be said for draft information. If you think the JSO or SI or the Athletic are the equivalent of drug dealers, maybe you should quit reading.

They are fatal because someone ingested them, not because someone sold them. Potato Tomato.

All this media talk is walking to close to the sun though (politics) and someone is going to end up suspended if we don't drop it.

[bobblehead]

Sometimes you sure are thick.

If no one was buying drugs there wouldn't be drug dealers. I am not placing blame anywhere. It is simply a fact. No demand for a product, no one provides a product.

There are a lot of reputable sources of good information. Not all sources are garbage. Just because you click on garbage sources and stories doesn't mean most or all media is garbage.

I'm going to go ahead and call you out Dan, because this is a very common tactic of yours. You CLEARLY placed blame on the consumer and then immediately resorted to being a raging dick when someone pointed out the problem with it. I'm not even disagreeing with you that the consumer is the problem, but you can't make that post then call Tex thick for pointing out an equivalent by playing the victim and pretending innocent you NEVER placed blame. You can call tex thick for a LOT of other things, but in this case you are simply coming across as a jerk.

Sorry, got to completely disagree with this.

"Media" as you define it creates content because you click on it or subscribe to it. If you stop watching the "media" and clicking on their articles, maybe we could have "media" that actually reports what is happening in the game and in the clubhouse.

But that isn't going to happen because so many people like to watch a trainwreck happen, real or imaginary. The "media" is what it is because of the collective "us".

How is this NOT placing blame.

[bobblehead]

What nobody has mentioned yet is that this is all an interdependent system. Journalists need clicks - it’s the business model - and so they play to the lowest common denominator, because that gets the most clicks. An article breaking down the nuances of the PFF system versus an article suggesting Aaron Rodgers is throwing Guter under the bus - which one gets more play? Guess.

But if journalists DON’T cover a team, the team suffers. The team needs the media. All you people calling the media names? Uh, geez, look how many announcers - part of the media - are FORMER PLAYERS. The Packers will not do well if the media doesn’t cover them.

It’s a closed interdependent system. It’s not just the good guys and the bad guys.

What a level headed rational response. I'm done reading your posts. I prefer some bomb throwing.

[Frozen Tundra]

Guter seems interested in adding a FA but running back does not seem like the right position for that.

If the object is to groom a possible replacement for Jones in 25, then I hope he's not looking to depend on a free agent RB; that's an especially bad idea this year. It'd be very poor asset management, especially when we have so many draft picks. A replacement for Jones would be a pretty expensive free agent.

But if we're just going to replace Dillonthis season, there seem to be roughly 8 (certainly 5 or 6) backs in the draft who we could bring in now, and at the end of the season we assess the outlook for Jones and plan accordingly. Maybe at the end of the year, we find that the FA would replace Jones in our system, and we draft another RB to play the Dillon role.

[Frozen Tundra]

You all miss a simple point. Gutes doesn't have to pay a RB 12 million a season. There are solid backs out there who won't get paid too much. Guys like Myles Sanders or Devin Singletary. Give them a good OL and opportunities and they can produce. We can sign one and draft one and bring one in undrafted and likely have 3 good RB to pair with Jones.

In your scenario, is this running back replacing Dillon this season then? Because if that's your plan, this might be a good use of the free agent market. I don't think we can afford to replace Jones in free agency, but guys like you're talking about here would probably be upgrades over AJ and come in at the same general price point.

[sharpe1027]

I'm going to go ahead and call you out Dan, because this is a very common tactic of yours. You CLEARLY placed blame on the consumer and then immediately resorted to being a raging dick when someone pointed out the problem with it. I'm not even disagreeing with you that the consumer is the problem, but you can't make that post then call Tex thick for pointing out an equivalent by playing the victim and pretending innocent you NEVER placed blame. You can call tex thick for a LOT of other things, but in this case you are simply coming across as a jerk.




How is this NOT placing blame.

It's a factual statement. You must first apply your own opinion to reach an assumption something is wrong before there can be blame.

Not taking sides on the whole issue, but that's how understood his point.

That being said, the implication of blame was a very reasonable assumption to reach given the context.

[Joemailman]

What a level headed rational response. I'm done reading your posts. I prefer some bomb throwing.

Innocent people could get hurt because they probably won't be smart bombs.

[George Cumby]

What's the price of tea in China, these days?

[Fritz]

If the object is to groom a possible replacement for Jones in 25, then I hope he's not looking to depend on a free agent RB; that's an especially bad idea this year. It'd be very poor asset management, especially when we have so many draft picks. A replacement for Jones would be a pretty expensive free agent.

But if we're just going to replace Dillonthis season, there seem to be roughly 8 (certainly 5 or 6) backs in the draft who we could bring in now, and at the end of the season we assess the outlook for Jones and plan accordingly. Maybe at the end of the year, we find that the FA would replace Jones in our system, and we draft another RB to play the Dillon role.

If this were the case, wouldn't you just offer Dillon a contract to, well, be Dillon for one more year?

My own opinion is that they ought to draft a couple of RB's, and let them back up Jones. I know, the pass blocking won't be the best for the first part of the season, but if they're smart they'll figure that out by mid-season.

Any FA money is, to me, best spent on a safety or a linebacker to hold down the fort for a year while the rookies they're going to draft get up to speed. I think it's easier for a RB to learn to pass block in year one than for a safety or a linebacker to learn the defense in the first year; thus, for me, a FA, if you're going to do it, would be better to be a safety or a linebacker. Preferably a safety.

[Frozen Tundra]

If this were the case, wouldn't you just offer Dillon a contract to, well, be Dillon for one more year?

Hmm... there is a certain logic to that idea, isn't there? He seems to be rather good at it...

But I don't know if we could make that work in 25. We might be able to sign him to a one-year deal this year, but I doubt he'd take another one the following season, because at his age I think he'd insist on several years' worth of security in 25.

Not sure what your thinking is on that, or for that matter how you feel about letting Dillon walk already this spring. How that falls together would obviously have a huge impact on our approach to drafting running backs this year. I really don't know what to expect about what Dillon does this year, so my whole concept of how to stock the RB shelf this off-season is multifaceted and complicated.

My own opinion is that they ought to draft a couple of RB's, and let them back up Jones. I know, the pass blocking won't be the best for the first part of the season, but if they're smart they'll figure that out by mid-season.

That is exactly my favorite plan, too, but I was hesitant to stick my neck out. Been away from this board a long time, felt reluctant to kick the door down and barge through it shouting out brash opinions.

Plus, I'm just not sure how realistic it would be to expect Gute to do that anyway. My idea would be one of the top half-dozen on Day 2 (probably early; first 3rd Rounder or even the 2nd 2nd Rounder), and one of the 2nd tier backs on Day 3 (probably early, Rd 4 or early 5 if we have one), and then see what we have as the pre-season and season develop. I just don't know if Gutekunst is brilliant enough to understand the wisdom of my insights.

My concern is this.... this offense absolutely depends on a powerful running game in order to open up all the options MLF wants to have at his disposal. If we don't have that, we're leaving 30% or more of the playbook in the locker room, because we don't have the tools we need to put it on the field. Our running game is the key to the entire thing. I'm confident that even if we don't do a thing about running back we'll be OK this year as long as we sign Dillon and Jones stays healthy, but I'm not completely confident he will stay healthy.

He's a pounding, hard-running workhorse back who'll be 30 years old this season, and I worked out that in the last 10 years, he has been tackled approximately 1800 times (college and pros, pre-season and playoffs). There comes a point in the late 20s where the body just can't take the beating anymore, or recover sufficiently between Sundays. Most RBs begin to decline significantly at around age 28, and when it happens, it's a very steady process, and there's no fixing it. It's just over.

I did a breakdown of roughly the top 25 RBs in the NFL (I know, there isn't a precise way to define that, but I like my list), and of those 25, Derrick Henry is the only one older than Jones (by 11 months). That man is a freak. But the point is, Jones is playing with house money, and if the Packers are counting on him playing anywhere close to this level through 2025, they're foolish. He may - it's possible - but it would be foolish to expect it and plan around that expectation. Statistically, it's extremely unlikely, and the consequences of being wrong are grave when a powerhouse team is building for a Super Bowl run in every single other category.

If ever there would be a circumstance where it would be reasonable to overspend draft capital on a position, I think this would be an example. It's far wiser for a team in our position to go heavy on RB a year too early than having to do it a year too late, because even a single year too late could literally cost us a Super Bowl more than almost any other positional weakness. And as we all know, you don't really get too many chances. I see 2025 as the prime year for our first best Lombardi run, and I think we should be doing everything we can for the next year and a half to line up all of our pieces for that run.

I just dread the possibility of going into the 2025 offseason needing to replace not just one, but both of our top two backs without our offense missing a beat. I think it's critical that we make that our top priority starting this offseason.

But, maybe I'm full of shit. Wouldn't be the first time. But I think that even if I am overstating this, it's not by a lot. I may be over-emphasizing the point, but even if I am I still think it's a solid point. I know a lot of people will disagree with me here, but that's not the first time I've had that happen. I'd be curious to know your thoughts on that whole line of reasoning.

Any FA money is, to me, best spent on a safety or a linebacker to hold down the fort for a year while the rookies they're going to draft get up to speed. I think it's easier for a RB to learn to pass block in year one than for a safety or a linebacker to learn the defense in the first year; thus, for me, a FA, if you're going to do it, would be better to be a safety or a linebacker. Preferably a safety.

I'm right there. I want to come out of this draft with depth on the O-line, and not just bodies - linemen who can not only fill in for a couple-few weeks if needed, but push the starters at (honestly) every position. Make 'em all fight for their jobs. And especially interior linemen; I'd be thrilled if we can replace Myers at center.

But that's something I trust Gute to figure out on Day 3 and maybe even 3rd or 4th Round of Day Two. It's gotten to the point where I just take it for granted that he's going to add at least one and probably 2 quality OL to the roster; it's like he just sees a guy walking down the street and says, "look at the way that guy moves in space, I need to give him my card." I have a very strong feeling that they have some of the best OL scouts in the league on their staff, and that Luke Butkus is an O-line coach who is worth his weight in gold - and one of the handful of truly unsung heroes on our coaching staff.

So yeah, OL is a position of need at least for depth at the very least, but i trust Gutekunst and won't freak out if we go into Day 3 without having picked OL yet. He'll handle that.

But we do need to come away from this offeason with linebacker and safety help, and probably cornerback too. I think we can draft a couple of starters at those positions in the early to middle rounds, and will be disappointed if we haven't picked up at least a couple before Day 3. I'd like to see us go safety in the 1st if the right one is there; I'm hoping for DeJean Cooper. Ideally, I'd love to see safety in Rd 1 if the right player is there, and another safety and a linebacker in the 2nd and 3rd.

But, again - only if Gute feels the right value is there at those moments. I fully expect him to flip a couple-few of those early picks, trade back 8 or 10 spots to get a depth player he expects to be there in the 4th and still steal a bargain in the 2nd or 3rd. I completely expect that, because he looks at the board very differently than most other GMs, and I also trust him to make it work. And if we need to spend some free agent money on short term stopgaps at safety or even linebacker, I think that's the best place to spend our UFA dollars.

One thing I know for sure, he's going to do some things that we can not possibly predict. Not today, and not even 2 minutes before he does it. And I wouldn't have it any other way. It's his draft to run, and I trust him to know better than I do what needs to be done and how it needs to be done. I think he's earned that.

[bobblehead]

In your scenario, is this running back replacing Dillon this season then? Because if that's your plan, this might be a good use of the free agent market. I don't think we can afford to replace Jones in free agency, but guys like you're talking about here would probably be upgrades over AJ and come in at the same general price point.

Basically yes. And no, I don't EVER want to pay a RB FA like we paid Jones. Jones earned that money with the Packers as a person and as a player. The contract was partially for services already rendered.

[bobblehead]

It's a factual statement. You must first apply your own opinion to reach an assumption something is wrong before there can be blame.

Not taking sides on the whole issue, but that's how understood his point.

That being said, the implication of blame was a very reasonable assumption to reach given the context.

Somewhat fair. I was probably grumpy. I'm partly sorry Dan, but Tex didn't elevate to name calling, he made a valid point and I thought the instant name calling was beneath you. If tex did it in reverse I guess i would ignore it because its not beneath him.

[bobblehead]

If this were the case, wouldn't you just offer Dillon a contract to, well, be Dillon for one more year?

My own opinion is that they ought to draft a couple of RB's, and let them back up Jones. I know, the pass blocking won't be the best for the first part of the season, but if they're smart they'll figure that out by mid-season.

Any FA money is, to me, best spent on a safety or a linebacker to hold down the fort for a year while the rookies they're going to draft get up to speed. I think it's easier for a RB to learn to pass block in year one than for a safety or a linebacker to learn the defense in the first year; thus, for me, a FA, if you're going to do it, would be better to be a safety or a linebacker. Preferably a safety.

Dillon is an FA RB that in fact could be signed to replace Dillon. You just don't pay him much.

[run pMc]

My own opinion is that they ought to draft a couple of RB's, and let them back up Jones. I know, the pass blocking won't be the best for the first part of the season, but if they're smart they'll figure that out by mid-season.

Agree. I think they probably feel pretty good about their passing game, but if they can get the running game up to that level they will be supercharged.

They have at least some ideas of a starting 5 OL (swapping in Rhyan for JRJ) but the depth and competition could be improved, Dillon's vision and quickness aren't strengths but there were times last year where there was simply no place for him to run. Jones is nimble enough to make chicken salad from chicken shit blocking. They could use a future OT to groom and someone to push Rhyan for the RG spot at a minimum. I don't think Luke Tenuta or Royce Newman as your OL6 is a good situation (I've just assumed Bahktiari isn't back).

Getting younger and more dynamic at RB is a must. There aren't any RBs in the consensus top 50; I think there's decent depth and they could easily spend 3 draft Day 3 on RB and find one or two who can backup and eventually succeed Jones. RBs get beat to hell and you need several. Emanuel Wilson and AJ Dillon and Patrick Taylor are nice but you can and should look to get better. Bringing them back is just having more of the same but a year older, slower and more beat up (and more expensive).