Off-season 2023 Banjo

[call_me_ishmael]

Part of me wonders how good this team could be if they had a Corey Linsley type guy at center and a prime Bryan Bulaga at RT. Those mid-2010 lines were so dominant. I would like to see the Packers draft some big uglies high and continue to build the team through the OL and DL. It seems like there is almost always a WR type player available via trade or something if they need a weapon.

[Joemailman]

Part of me wonders how good this team could be if they had a Corey Linsley type guy at center and a prime Bryan Bulaga at RT. Those mid-2010 lines were so dominant. I would like to see the Packers draft some big uglies high and continue to build the team through the OL and DL. It seems like there is almost always a WR type player available via trade or something if they need a weapon.

Not sure if drafting high is always the key though. Sitton, Lang, Tretter, Bakhtiari were 4th round picks. Linsley was a 5th round pick. On the other hand, Myers and Jason Spriggs were 2nd round picks. Bottom line is, you have to make some good picks no matter what the round is. Gute has traded away quite a few mid-round picks to move up in draft. Maybe he needs to keep more of those picks so he has more shots of getting one right. Zach Tom is looking like a good 4th round pick. Hopefully we'll see more of those.

[texaspackerbacker]

Hard to believe Myers isn't appreciated. We never had much inside running with Linsley. Myers is about as good for pass blocking and way better for run blocking.

[Joemailman]

Hard to believe Myers isn't appreciated. We never had much inside running with Linsley. Myers is about as good for pass blocking and way better for run blocking.

You and maybe Myers' mother are the only ones who think he is as good as Linsley.

[run pMc]

You and maybe Myers' mother are the only ones who think he is as good as Linsley.

HAHAHAHA this.
Myers is not as good as Linsley, and it's not particularly close. Myers hasn't been a disaster, but he's been mediocre and possibly even a slight disappointment. I would not be shocked if they don't bring in stronger competition for him this offseason. You might want to revisit some of your posts re: Linsley, especially in his contract year with GB.

You can find pretty good OL all over the place in the draft and occasionally UDFAs. Those tend to be IOL; most OT are R1 and R2 picks. Bakhtiari is a rare Day 3 LT who played well enough to get All Pro and Pro Bowl nods. If you look back over the last 10-15 years you won't see many of those in end of season lists.

The vast majority of All-Pro OL and DL actually are taken in R1 or R2, it's been proven you can find TEs and WRs later. In other words, there is some statistical proof that drafting big men (and QBs) early is a good strategy.

[texaspackerbacker]

How do you Linley overraters and Myers detractors explain the excellent inside running game we've had the past two seasons - far better than we had with Linsley as Center?

[run pMc]

How do you Linley overraters and Myers detractors explain the excellent inside running game we've had the past two seasons - far better than we had with Linsley as Center?

Can you provide proof that it's 'far better'? What does 'far better' mean?
There are statistics that tell you the offense did poorly on 4th downs and also inside the 5 with Myers at starter this year compared with 2 years ago.

[ThunderDan]

Can you provide proof that it's 'far better'? What does 'far better' mean?
There are statistics that tell you the offense did poorly on 4th downs and also inside the 5 with Myers at starter this year compared with 2 years ago.

Well, Tex has been complaining for years that Bach sucks and we can't run outside zone. So that means we can only run inside zone. And Tex remembers that one play where Myers had a good block so he must be better.

Actual numbers:
2022: 456 attempts, 2,113 yards, 12 TDs, 4.63 YPC
2021: 446 attempts, 1,900 yards, 13 TDs, 4.26 YPC
2020: 443 attempts, 2,118 yards, 16 TDs, 4.78 YPC
2019: 411 attempts, 1,795 yards, 18 TDs, 4.37 YPC
2018: 333 attempts, 1,667 yards, 14 TDs, 5.01 YPC

Of course totals don't tell you what the play call was or not.

[run pMc]

Also: when looking at totals consider the last two years have included a 17th game.

[bobblehead]

Hard to believe Myers isn't appreciated. We never had much inside running with Linsley. Myers is about as good for pass blocking and way better for run blocking.

1) We had great inside running with Lindsey. 2) Myers was damn good his rookie year, but regressed this last season. Not totally uncommon coming off an injury. I'll be interested in year 3.

[bobblehead]

How do you Linley overraters and Myers detractors explain the excellent inside running game we've had the past two seasons - far better than we had with Linsley as Center?

Do I need to explain something you are wrong about??

[texaspackerbacker]

Well, Tex has been complaining for years that Bach sucks and we can't run outside zone. So that means we can only run inside zone. And Tex remembers that one play where Myers had a good block so he must be better.

Actual numbers:
2022: 456 attempts, 2,113 yards, 12 TDs, 4.63 YPC
2021: 446 attempts, 1,900 yards, 13 TDs, 4.26 YPC
2020: 443 attempts, 2,118 yards, 16 TDs, 4.78 YPC
2019: 411 attempts, 1,795 yards, 18 TDs, 4.37 YPC
2018: 333 attempts, 1,667 yards, 14 TDs, 5.01 YPC

Of course totals don't tell you what the play call was or not.

At least you got your last line right. I'm fairly sure a whole lot more of those successful runs were up the middle/in the guard-center gap. And a lot of failed outside runs were to Bakhtiari's side. Claiming Myers had a good block on "one play" is both blind and stupid. Somebody said Myers regressed after the injury in his second season ....... maybe some. It's also possible the Guard play wasn't as good.

As for Linsley, he was good too, although I still don't think he was as good as Myers. And Linsley was commanding way too much money. It was a good move to let him go.

[KYPack]

Tex, as my gramp would say, "Your eyes must be brown, cause you are full of shit"

Cease and desist with your evaluation of Oline personnel.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

[texaspackerbacker]

So you're saying the team did NOT run with great success inside and did NOT generally have very little success running outside either left or right? Seriously?

[sharpe1027]

So you're saying the team did NOT run with great success inside and did NOT generally have very little success running outside either left or right? Seriously?

I don't see where he said that.

[NewsBruin]

Hendon Hooker? 2nd might be a little early. But it's early. He'd be a developmental guy who ran a spread offense very different from NFL offenses.

I don't know who he played for, but it reminds me a lot of Art Briles' offense: quick to formation, widely spaced receivers, deep routes, small route tree. This forces the defense to play a lot of man. QB reads only left or right half of the field, picks his target based on alignment and feasts off the fourth-best receiver being better than the fourth-best DB. Throw in QB/RB delayed handoff drawing safetys close, pulling OL on every play, and CFB's more generous downfield-blocking tolerance, and it's a vicious concept that doesn't translate well to the pros.

[NewsBruin]

Ish, that seems like EXACTLY the kind of thing Rodgers would do.

Not sure how the security part would work. Maybe the facility has private security all over the place. And someone to greet you after four days without light, to re-orient you. Bet that messes a person up.

Might just go to his five-car garage and have an epiphany after tripping over the lawnmower.

[call_me_ishmael]

Rodgers buddies all void tomorrow so today should be telling about the future for him,

[call_me_ishmael]

Jimmy in Philly. Why did GB not make the call? Flower is a good coach but won’t be great if he won’t try to get incremental

https://www.reddit.com/r/GreenBayPackers/comments/117e944/fowler_the_eagles_have_interviewed_former/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

[Joemailman]

Jimmy in Philly. Why did GB not make the call? Flower is a good coach but won’t be great if he won’t try to get incremental

https://www.reddit.com/r/GreenBayPackers/comments/117e944/fowler_the_eagles_have_interviewed_former/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

Didn't Leonhard turn down the Packers DC job 2 years ago?

[RashanGary]

In a few hours the 16M in dead cap space for the void contracts hits. Even if we clear up 16 million with restructures, it’ll still just bring us back to breaking even. This is where you get to the point in the road where you already kicked the can.

[bobblehead]

In a few hours the 16M in dead cap space for the void contracts hits. Even if we clear up 16 million with restructures, it’ll still just bring us back to breaking even. This is where you get to the point in the road where you already kicked the can.

And this, along with trading away draft picks to move up constantly is what I hammer Gutes for.

[texaspackerbacker]

I still say Myers is the best player in the current O Line, and he is about as good as Linsley was when he demanded too much money and was let go, and the proof of that is the excellent inside running game the Packers have had the past couple of years.

[call_me_ishmael]

What team without a rookie contract QB isn’t in cap hell right now?

[Bretsky]

I still say Myers is the best player in the current O Line, and he is about as good as Linsley was when he demanded too much money and was let go, and the proof of that is the excellent inside running game the Packers have had the past couple of years.



TEX refer to Susan Powers catch phrase with all of this . He's fine. But he's just fine. But hes not our our best OL; and hes not nearly as good as Linsley

[texaspackerbacker]

Way better for the money than Linsley demanded - and got - from the Chargers or whoever. And other than Jenkins before his knee injury, nobody in the O Line has played better, and that includes the sacred cow.

[Fritz]

What team without a rookie contract QB isn’t in cap hell right now?

The Detroit Lions.

[call_me_ishmael]

The Detroit Lions.

Fair but give it a few :) It's funny - I think everyone thought Goff was overpaid but with how QB contracts have gone he is now a deal

[texaspackerbacker]

I would say that for all practical purposes, the concept of "cap hell" doesn't exist. However, for those who do believe in that sort of thing, which would you rather have, a chronic loser team (think the Lions) that is in good shape cap-wise, OR a team that has a record like the Packers have had for 3+ decades with Favre and Rodgers?

[Fritz]

The problem with your either/or is that it's not quite the truth. The Packers were in good shape cap-wise for years, even with Rodgers, when Ted was at the helm. He may have been even a bit too careful. But he did manage the cap very well. Gutes had that advantage when he took over, and he's used that all up and then some.

And yes, the Packers are in a cap hell. Wait to hear people start yelling when the Packers don't sign anyone in free agency because they can't afford to, or when a good player walks because the team couldn't afford the next contract.

[run pMc]

What team without a rookie contract QB isn’t in cap hell right now?

Define cap hell.

Broncos, Colts, Lions, Cardinals, Ravens, Seahawks, not sure about Falcons or Commanders. Those are some of the teams below the cap to start 2023.
Even if you're a team above the cap by ~$5M you can probably gain that space by cutting an underperforming player or restructuring/extending a player's contract without too much pain. It's when you've done that with all your possible contracts and you are still right against the cap now and likely over again in the next year that you run into problems.

TT was pretty good about keeping the team in good shape with the cap. I have to wonder if this is Murphy pushing to keep the team together more than Gute or MLF.

[run pMc]

I still say Myers is the best player in the current O Line, and he is about as good as Linsley was when he demanded too much money and was let go, and the proof of that is the excellent inside running game the Packers have had the past couple of years.

And I will say you are wrong. Josh Myers was NOT the best player on the OL last year. You can say PFF grades suck, but Bakhtiari graded out at 79.8, Jenkins at 72.3, Njiman at 63.1, Runyan at 62.6, Myers at 60.4. It sounds like PFF graded out the OL the exact opposite from you. He ranked at 26th out of 36 Centers who started at least 4 games.

Oh, and Corey Linsley? Linsley graded out at a 74.

The eyeball test also showed Myers was inconsistent -- some good along with some bad. For a big guy he struggled with power and got worked over pretty good (if not embarrassed) by NTs at times. They ask him to do a lot and he's a good athlete, but he struggled, and I think they will bring in competition. Rodgers was saying Linsley was a Pro Bowl C in his rookie year; he cusses out Myers. If Myers doesn't get it together this year it might look like a bad pick considering Creed Humphrey was there.

Consider Zach Tom got a 68.4 grade, Royce Newman a 57.5 and you'll get a better idea of where Myers is.

[bobblehead]

Define cap hell.

Broncos, Colts, Lions, Cardinals, Ravens, Seahawks, not sure about Falcons or Commanders. Those are some of the teams below the cap to start 2023.
Even if you're a team above the cap by ~$5M you can probably gain that space by cutting an underperforming player or restructuring/extending a player's contract without too much pain. It's when you've done that with all your possible contracts and you are still right against the cap now and likely over again in the next year that you run into problems.

TT was pretty good about keeping the team in good shape with the cap. I have to wonder if this is Murphy pushing to keep the team together more than Gute or MLF.

He should have been more specific. Name a team without a rookie contract QB that doesn't suck and isn't in cap hell. And just for reference the Ravens QB WAS on a rookie deal and currently counts for ZERO against the cap.

[call_me_ishmael]

Define cap hell.

Broncos, Colts, Lions, Cardinals, Ravens, Seahawks, not sure about Falcons or Commanders. Those are some of the teams below the cap to start 2023.
Even if you're a team above the cap by ~$5M you can probably gain that space by cutting an underperforming player or restructuring/extending a player's contract without too much pain. It's when you've done that with all your possible contracts and you are still right against the cap now and likely over again in the next year that you run into problems.

TT was pretty good about keeping the team in good shape with the cap. I have to wonder if this is Murphy pushing to keep the team together more than Gute or MLF.

I think it’s as simple as then wanting to keep the window open as long as possible after 2 straight NFCC appearances and coming off the first MVP year. I don’t think there is any long term risk. Whenever they cut over to the next QB they will pay the piper for a year and suck and then get some high picks and money to get right back to where they belong if the QB is capable.

The year the team stunk when cutting over the Rodgers gave them the studs the helped them win the SB two years later. I love that plan personally.

[run pMc]

And just for reference the Ravens QB WAS on a rookie deal and currently counts for ZERO against the cap.
Ah, for some reason I thought he was on the franchise one-year deal and they were threatening to do it again. I'm a year early.

[Fritz]

And I will say you are wrong. Josh Myers was NOT the best player on the OL last year. You can say PFF grades suck, but Bakhtiari graded out at 79.8, Jenkins at 72.3, Njiman at 63.1, Runyan at 62.6, Myers at 60.4. It sounds like PFF graded out the OL the exact opposite from you. He ranked at 26th out of 36 Centers who started at least 4 games.

Oh, and Corey Linsley? Linsley graded out at a 74.

The eyeball test also showed Myers was inconsistent -- some good along with some bad. For a big guy he struggled with power and got worked over pretty good (if not embarrassed) by NTs at times. They ask him to do a lot and he's a good athlete, but he struggled, and I think they will bring in competition. Rodgers was saying Linsley was a Pro Bowl C in his rookie year; he cusses out Myers. If Myers doesn't get it together this year it might look like a bad pick considering Creed Humphrey was there.

Consider Zach Tom got a 68.4 grade, Royce Newman a -57.5 and you'll get a better idea of where Myers is.

Fixed that for you.

[Joemailman]

Jimmy in Philly. Why did GB not make the call? Flower is a good coach but won’t be great if he won’t try to get incremental

https://www.reddit.com/r/GreenBayPackers/comments/117e944/fowler_the_eagles_have_interviewed_former/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

Leonhard not being hired by Philly.

[call_me_ishmael]

Kinda odd. I wonder what actually transpired in those conversations. I don't get it to be honest. You have all the money in the world - generational wealth - why would you want to uproot your kids so you can work 12 hours a day?

[bobblehead]

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/2023/02/26/former-packers-s-chris-banjo-retiring-from-nfl-entering-coaching-with-broncos/

This probably belongs in the ex packers thread, but I'll appropriately call it "Less Banjo"

[call_me_ishmael]

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/2023/02/26/former-packers-s-chris-banjo-retiring-from-nfl-entering-coaching-with-broncos/

This probably belongs in the ex packers thread, but I'll appropriately call it "Less Banjo"

Wow, that is super great. 10 year career for a guy like that is hella impressive. Scrappy, tenacious dude to say the least.

[bobblehead]

.

[Joemailman]

.

?

[Fritz]

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/2023/02/26/former-packers-s-chris-banjo-retiring-from-nfl-entering-coaching-with-broncos/

This probably belongs in the ex packers thread, but I'll appropriately call it "Less Banjo"

The threa was named after this guy, so it's entirely appropriate here.

[call_me_ishmael]

Packers are 17th in cap space.

https://twitter.com/wendellfp/status/1630215772881444865

[Fritz]

Wow. I am under the impression the Packers are frantically kicking every can they see down the road to try to get by this year. So does that mean there are another fifteen teams or so that are worse off than that?

[Joemailman]

Wow. I am under the impression the Packers are frantically kicking every can they see down the road to try to get by this year. So does that mean there are another fifteen teams or so that are worse off than that?

Yes. https://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space

[texaspackerbacker]

Wow. I am under the impression the Packers are frantically kicking every can they see down the road to try to get by this year. So does that mean there are another fifteen teams or so that are worse off than that?

No no no. The Packers are just cruising along, doing what needs to be done for short term deadlines, etc. The cap can always be defeated. As the chart shows, almost half the league is worse off than the Packers on the cap, many MUCH worse, and many are worse off for dead money, and trust me, ALL of those will field at very least a moderately competitive team. The other thing to notice from that chart is that the teams in "cap heaven" - seemingly best shape cap-wise - are for the most part, the current and/or perennial losers in the league. Be careful what you wish for, ya'all cap worry worts hahahahahahaha.

[run pMc]

https://twitter.com/KenIngalls/status/1629678841441427456?cxt=HHwWgICxobOR5J0tAAAA

Ken Ingalls - Packers Cap 💰
@KenIngalls
Between 2021 & 2022 the Green Bay Packers pushed $34.2M of salary cap costs into the 2023 league year.

So far, with 3 restructures pushing 2023 expense into 2024-2027, the Packers have cleared $27.9M of space.

$6.3M to go just to clear the cost of going for it the past 2 years.
9:04 PM · Feb 25, 2023
·
56.1K
Views

[Sparkey]

The big IF with pushing money to future years is: IF WE DRAFT WELL......

Because you will need to find exceptional talent on cheap early contracts to minimize the impact to the depth of the roster as it will be harder and harder to fill spots with veterans and/or extend the guys you have.

[Fritz]

The big IF with pushing money to future years is: IF WE DRAFT WELL......

Because you will need to find exceptional talent on cheap early contracts to minimize the impact to the depth of the roster as it will be harder and harder to fill spots with veterans and/or extend the guys you have.

This be a good point.

That chart Joe posted would take some studying. The Chiefs, for example, have very, very little dead money - you'd think that's a good thing - yet they are beneath the Packers in cap space. So do they just have a lot of active players they are paying a lot of money to? And the Iggles - lots of dead money there, so how'd they pay to have a Super Bowl team this year?

[Sparkey]

This be a good point.

That chart Joe posted would take some studying. The Chiefs, for example, have very, very little dead money - you'd think that's a good thing - yet they are beneath the Packers in cap space. So do they just have a lot of active players they are paying a lot of money to? And the Iggles - lots of dead money there, so how'd they pay to have a Super Bowl team this year?

In 2023, Hurts will earn a base salary of $4,204,000 and a workout bonus of $100,000, while carrying a cap hit of $4,789,486 and a dead cap value of $485,486.

^^^ That is Why ^^^

[run pMc]

And also Devonte Smith etc. - basically they have some younger cheaper players who are emerging.
They will have a number of starters who are FA - Javon Hargraves is going to break the bank.
Also, Howie Roseman is a pretty good GM, and he's managed to steal some picks and players from NO.

With KC, they have to be up against the cap -- they're talking about Frank Clark being let go. They did well without Tyreek Hill, if he was on the team they would be in worse shape. Also, Mahomes' cap number jumps next year from $36M to $49M.

[sharpe1027]

This be a good point.

That chart Joe posted would take some studying. The Chiefs, for example, have very, very little dead money - you'd think that's a good thing - yet they are beneath the Packers in cap space. So do they just have a lot of active players they are paying a lot of money to? And the Iggles - lots of dead money there, so how'd they pay to have a Super Bowl team this year?

Where teams are now with cap is just a snapshot in time. Dead money comes from cutting players, which usually happens because the team is otherwise going to be over the cap. It can be made worse by restructuring to move money into later years.

Looking at the Packers, for example, we just voided and restructured deals. That means we have roster spots to fill and we pushed contract risk for restructured players into future years. A team that was in decent cap space wouldn't have needed to make similar cuts, so they may have a larger cap number, lowe dead money and have lost less through cuts.

[call_me_ishmael]

I laughed.

https://www.reddit.com/r/GreenBayPackers/comments/11dvc4f/when_rodgers_announced_his_darkness_retreat_the/

[Fritz]

No no no. The Packers are just cruising along, doing what needs to be done for short term deadlines, etc. The cap can always be defeated. As the chart shows, almost half the league is worse off than the Packers on the cap, many MUCH worse, and many are worse off for dead money, and trust me, ALL of those will field at very least a moderately competitive team. The other thing to notice from that chart is that the teams in "cap heaven" - seemingly best shape cap-wise - are for the most part, the current and/or perennial losers in the league. Be careful what you wish for, ya'all cap worry worts hahahahahahaha.

So if the cap can always be defeated, New Orleans should be just fine this year, make whatever moves they want to.

[texaspackerbacker]

I'm not familiar with what's the big deal about the Saints. They are second from worst on the chart, and Tampa is nearly twice as bad off as they are. They may not be fine this year for kinda the same reason as the Bears won't be fine - they don't have very good players. They will, however, OF COURSE field a team, and I doubt it will be significantly worse than they were last season. You mentioned the Chiefs - 5 notches worse than the Packers but very little dead money. Yeah, that might be an indicator of quality - few high paid players that failed (often a matter of injuries or other forms of luck). The Texans also have relatively little dead money, though, and they stunk last season and probably next also.

There was discussion of the Eagles somewhere in here. They are just below the Packers cap-wise, and presumably they have a huge contract coming up for Hurts. I doubt their fans are whining or worrying, but maybe some are, just like in here.

I say again, as I've said for maybe a decade or more, and this chart seems to point out, teams that play it close to the edge of the cap tend to have more success than those who are too cautious. As I also have said for at least a decade, LUCK is the primary factor in a lot of areas.

Just because the cap can be handled or defeated doesn't mean you can buy a winner - sorta what runpMc said in this or another thread, there are limits.

[run pMc]

This be a good point.

That chart Joe posted would take some studying. The Chiefs, for example, have very, very little dead money - you'd think that's a good thing - yet they are beneath the Packers in cap space. So do they just have a lot of active players they are paying a lot of money to? And the Iggles - lots of dead money there, so how'd they pay to have a Super Bowl team this year?

Re: the Eagles, here's their list of FA:CB James Bradberry, S C.J. Gardner-Johnson, DT Fletcher Cox, DE Robert Quinn, DE Brandon Graham, DT Javon Hargrave, C Jason Kelce, G Isaac Seumalo, T Andre Dillard, LB Kyzir White, LB T.J. Edwards, DT Ndamukong Suh, DT Linval Joseph, RB Miles Sanders, RB Boston Scott

They have $6M of cap space. Per Football Outsiders, the defensive players on this list logged 7000 snaps in total. Their defense will likely look completely different next year.
It's also worth pointing out that besides AJ Brown, they also dealt picks for now-FA's Gardner-Johnson and Quinn. They really went after it this year and came just short.

It's hard to win a Super Bowl.

[Fritz]

Re: the Eagles, here's their list of FA:CB James Bradberry, S C.J. Gardner-Johnson, DT Fletcher Cox, DE Robert Quinn, DE Brandon Graham, DT Javon Hargrave, C Jason Kelce, G Isaac Seumalo, T Andre Dillard, LB Kyzir White, LB T.J. Edwards, DT Ndamukong Suh, DT Linval Joseph, RB Miles Sanders, RB Boston Scott

They have $6M of cap space. Per Football Outsiders, the defensive players on this list logged 7000 snaps in total. Their defense will likely look completely different next year.
It's also worth pointing out that besides AJ Brown, they also dealt picks for now-FA's Gardner-Johnson and Quinn. They really went after it this year and came just short.

It's hard to win a Super Bowl.

That used to happen to me in my twenties.

[texaspackerbacker]

Re: the Eagles, here's their list of FA:CB James Bradberry, S C.J. Gardner-Johnson, DT Fletcher Cox, DE Robert Quinn, DE Brandon Graham, DT Javon Hargrave, C Jason Kelce, G Isaac Seumalo, T Andre Dillard, LB Kyzir White, LB T.J. Edwards, DT Ndamukong Suh, DT Linval Joseph, RB Miles Sanders, RB Boston Scott

They have $6M of cap space. Per Football Outsiders, the defensive players on this list logged 7000 snaps in total. Their defense will likely look completely different next year.
It's also worth pointing out that besides AJ Brown, they also dealt picks for now-FA's Gardner-Johnson and Quinn. They really went after it this year and came just short.

It's hard to win a Super Bowl.

Which points out why I always say, I'd much rather my favorite team cruise along and win 13 or 14 most every year, feast or famine for the Super Bowl be damned.

[call_me_ishmael]

So if the cap can always be defeated, New Orleans should be just fine this year, make whatever moves they want to.

No, but the reason they are not a great team is not so much past cap decisions as that their good players signed to big deals got hurt. They have a lot of talent IMO. Just need a QB.

[sharpe1027]

The cap discuss is a joke. Nobody argues that a team will be unable to field enough players. That's just stupid thing to even bring up.

It's simpler that that. Every team is competing for the same players, whether it's true free agency or resigning before players hi t free agency. A team that has more cap room can pay more to sign better players, sign more players, or both.

So, you can always move things around to field a full roster, but comparatively teams are able to sign better or more players based on past decisions. There are no free passes.

[ThunderDan]

No, but the reason they are not a great team is not so much past cap decisions as that their good players signed to big deals got hurt. They have a lot of talent IMO. Just need a QB.

Not really true, NO had $43,000,000 in dead money in 2022. They did have a lot of injuries but they couldn't use 21.33% of their cap to sign actual players to their 2022 roster.

[NewsBruin]

Cap hell + low passing talent is presumably the reason Sean Payton left the Saints.

[call_me_ishmael]

Not really true, NO had $43,000,000 in dead money in 2022. They did have a lot of injuries but they couldn't use 21.33% of their cap to sign actual players to their 2022 roster.

Good point but they still had a lot of good players on the roster. They'll be back in no time if cantguardmike gets healthy.

[texaspackerbacker]

The cap discuss is a joke. Nobody argues that a team will be unable to field enough players. That's just stupid thing to even bring up.

It's simpler that that. Every team is competing for the same players, whether it's true free agency or resigning before players hi t free agency. A team that has more cap room can pay more to sign better players, sign more players, or both.

So, you can always move things around to field a full roster, but comparatively teams are able to sign better or more players based on past decisions. There are no free passes.

Cap room undoubtedly is one of the factors in who free agents go to, but far from the only factor. It's at least as important which teams are willing to stretch things to the limit and which ones are not. Another factor, of course, is current players and coaches that potential FAs want to play with and for. The bottom line is that even though there is a limit, teams can do pretty much whatever the decide is necessary.

From what I gather from these posts above, it seems like New Orleans had some bad luck - injuries, etc. - that hurt them a lot more than cap or dead money problems.

[sharpe1027]

Cap room undoubtedly is one of the factors in who free agents go to, but far from the only factor. It's at least as important which teams are willing to stretch things to the limit and which ones are not. Another factor, of course, is current players and coaches that potential FAs want to play with and for. The bottom line is that even though there is a limit, teams can do pretty much whatever the decide is necessary.

From what I gather from these posts above, it seems like New Orleans had some bad luck - injuries, etc. - that hurt them a lot more than cap or dead money problems.

Teams are all competing for the same limited set of players. Teams can't do whatever they want because that would mean they would mean the same players would sign for multiple teams.

[texaspackerbacker]

They can offer pretty much whatever they want. It's still up to the player - and usually other factors who they go to. Supposedly the Packers offered Davante Adams as much or more than the Raiders but he chose to take the Raider offer.

As for that "same set of players", not every team values players the same, and as I said, there are a ton of other non-cap related reasons why players decide where to go.

[sharpe1027]

They can offer pretty much whatever they want. It's still up to the player - and usually other factors who they go to. Supposedly the Packers offered Davante Adams as much or more than the Raiders but he chose to take the Raider offer.

As for that "same set of players", not every team values players the same, and as I said, there are a ton of other non-cap related reasons why players decide where to go.

You're just deflecting again to avoid admitting the logic in your argument has a gaping hole. If one team is $20M over the cap and another is $10M under the cap, which one can offer the most amount of money to sign players?

[texaspackerbacker]

Deflecting? I'm just saying that cap space is far from the only factor in getting free agents, and for that matter, getting free agents is even farther from the only factor in having a good team. Do you disagree with that?

[sharpe1027]

Deflecting? I'm just saying that cap space is far from the only factor in getting free agents, and for that matter, getting free agents is even farther from the only factor in having a good team. Do you disagree with that?

Thank you captain obvious.

Which team can spend more?

[texaspackerbacker]

The Bears, I guess hahahaha - do you seriously expect that to make a helluva lot of difference?

[sharpe1027]

I don't consider salary cap or free agent spending to be the main indicator of a team's success.

I also don't pretend that signing and salary decisions have no effect because teams can somehow magically spend whatever they want without any adverse effects because they can "cook" the books in some undefined way that doesn't make any difference to future spend.

[texaspackerbacker]

It's not "some undefined way that doesn't make any difference to future spend" or "cooking the books" in some crooked way. It's skating along the edge of the cap rules, analyzing the consequences, and having the balls to do what needs to be done - if a team chooses to play it that way. The winners generally do; The perennial losers generally don't. And the proverbial can CAN be kicked on down the road just about indefinitely.

[sharpe1027]

It's not "some undefined way that doesn't make any difference to future spend" or "cooking the books" in some crooked way. It's skating along the edge of the cap rules, analyzing the consequences, and having the balls to do what needs to be done - if a team chooses to play it that way. The winners generally do; The perennial losers generally don't. And the proverbial can CAN be kicked on down the road just about indefinitely.

If it counts against the cap, there's a consequence. It doesn't show up as not being able to field a team or strict relationship between wins and losses. In fact, pushing cap into future years can result in more wins. It absolutely still has an effect on future years and it's a trade-off.

What's annoying about your view is you regurgitate the same oversimplified argument to dismiss an discussion that doesn't align with your view of Aaron Rodgers and his contract. It's not like people are arguing the Packers can't field a team because of Rodgers contract, they just realize that having $30M in dead cap necessarily impacts the depth and quality of players on the team. It's not a death sentence, but it's ridiculous to pretend it has zero affect.

[bobblehead]

Sometimes I envision Tex as a real life George Castanza.

[RashanGary]

Sometimes I envision Tex as a real life George Castanza.

That’s a good comp. They kicked 30 into this year so when they clear 30 they just break even. It’s no advantage.

[Sparkey]

Sometimes I envision Tex as a real life George Castanza.

Tex as George: "I'm Disturbed, I'm Depressed, I'm Inadequate - I've Got It All!"

[texaspackerbacker]

If it counts against the cap, there's a consequence. It doesn't show up as not being able to field a team or strict relationship between wins and losses. In fact, pushing cap into future years can result in more wins. It absolutely still has an effect on future years and it's a trade-off.

What's annoying about your view is you regurgitate the same oversimplified argument to dismiss an discussion that doesn't align with your view of Aaron Rodgers and his contract. It's not like people are arguing the Packers can't field a team because of Rodgers contract, they just realize that having $30M in dead cap necessarily impacts the depth and quality of players on the team. It's not a death sentence, but it's ridiculous to pretend it has zero affect.

Try reading a little bit. Did I ever say "zero effect"? Hell no. I did say nothing that can't be overcome - fairly easily. I also pointed out - over and over - that the teams (based on that chart) that seemingly are in cap trouble are generally the consistent winners, and the teams on the end that some of ya'all would like, supposedly great shape on the cap, they tend to be perennial losers.

bobblehead, who the fuck is George Castanza? Never mind, I'll Google him. Oh. God damned Seinfeld, a show I'm proud to say I literally never watched.

[sharpe1027]

It's not zero effect, but the effect doesn't really matter at all because it can be easily overcome? Talk about splitting hairs for no apparent substantive reason.

[texaspackerbacker]

Uh ....... yeah. Have I not been totally consistent in saying the cap can be manipulated/handled/defeated?

You're absolutely correct that cap room is a factor in getting FAs signed or not. No argument there. However, I say again, IT'S FAR FROM THE ONLY FACTOR, and based on that chart, THE TEAMS WITH THE BEST CAP SITUATION - BEARS AT THE TOP OF THE LIST - STINK THE WORST, WHILE TEAMS WITH THE WORST CAP PROBLEMS - PACKERS BEING NOT MUCH BELOW THE MIDDLE OF THE PACK - ARE GENERALLY THE MOST CONSISTENT WINNERS. Do you disagree with that? No? Then why make such a big deal about the cap?

[RashanGary]

The packers literally pushed 30M into this year. So after they clear 30M by pushing it into next year they’ll just be at break even. It’s not an advantage anymore.

But the way the cap inflates, there is a slight advantage paying later.

But the way the void contracts work (no comp picks) that kind of bites you in the ass.


Rodgers contract gets significantly worse if we keep him beyond this year. More than likely they’d have to rework it and add void years. They have a lot of motivation to trade though. The contract is set up for a trade this year. Too bad he’s such a weirdo and had a down year. Might not get much for a 40 year old mulling retirement and not playing so great.

[sharpe1027]

Uh ....... yeah. Have I not been totally consistent in saying the cap can be manipulated/handled/defeated?

You're absolutely correct that cap room is a factor in getting FAs signed or not. No argument there. However, I say again, IT'S FAR FROM THE ONLY FACTOR, and based on that chart, THE TEAMS WITH THE BEST CAP SITUATION - BEARS AT THE TOP OF THE LIST - STINK THE WORST, WHILE TEAMS WITH THE WORST CAP PROBLEMS - PACKERS BEING NOT MUCH BELOW THE MIDDLE OF THE PACK - ARE GENERALLY THE MOST CONSISTENT WINNERS. Do you disagree with that? No? Then why make such a big deal about the cap?
Yeah, it's not as simple as the cap doesn't matter or lower cap is good Glad you finally came around to what the rest of us have been talking about from the start

[sharpe1027]

You can't judge cap management by looking at the cap situation at one point in time. Teams that are way under the cap now will use it up. For example, they may restructure a good young player to front load their contract so later years are cap friendly. If they aren't doing that, they're wasting cap room.

[texaspackerbacker]

What????? That's what I've been saying all along hahahahahaha. It seems like you were the one trying to make such a big deal out of the cap - not that you were the only one with that damn dumb idea. Now finally you're saying it's "not as simple as the cap"? Welcome into the light, and nice example of cap manipulation. Tell Bears fans how good that lower cap is hahahahaha.

[sharpe1027]

What????? That's what I've been saying all along hahahahahaha. It seems like you were the one trying to make such a big deal out of the cap - not that you were the only one with that damn dumb idea. Now finally you're saying it's "not as simple as the cap"? Welcome into the light, and nice example of cap manipulation. Tell Bears fans how good that lower cap is hahahahaha.

Maybe I read too much into you stating teams can offer pretty much whatever they want to players. I am not sure what you mean by a big deal. I said it's at least relevant to how much two competing teams can offer a player.

[texaspackerbacker]

Well, if this latest post is your position, we don't have any disagreement hahahahaha. I say again, welcome in from the dark side.

[sharpe1027]

Well, if this latest post is your position, we don't have any disagreement hahahahaha. I say again, welcome in from the dark side.

Thanks, but I haven't changed my position at all.

[call_me_ishmael]

This is the way.

https://twitter.com/PeteHaileyNBCS/status/1631373870270652428

[bobblehead]

It's not zero effect, but the effect doesn't really matter at all because it can be easily overcome? Talk about splitting hairs for no apparent substantive reason.

Sharpe you god damned piece of shit, don't you know zero and nothing are entirely different!!

[bobblehead]

You can't judge cap management by looking at the cap situation at one point in time. Teams that are way under the cap now will use it up. For example, they may restructure a good young player to front load their contract so later years are cap friendly. If they aren't doing that, they're wasting cap room.

Sadly this is really hard to do because the players will play out the early years then hold out. A few teams tried it and it blew up on them. I think Antonio Brown was one example. The early money is banked along with most of the signing bonus. Now the all pro has a base $5 million contract and decides to hold out.

[texaspackerbacker]

First of all, higher character more "Packer type" guys won't do that. Secondly, if they are still worth keeping in those later years, you can restructure/kick the can down the road again, placate the guy with a nice bonus, and do it all again. Think Aaron Jones in both cases.

[bobblehead]

First of all, higher character more "Packer type" guys won't do that. Secondly, if they are still worth keeping in those later years, you can restructure/kick the can down the road again, placate the guy with a nice bonus, and co it all again. Think Aaron Jones in both cases.

I like the current method the league has rotated into. Virtually locked in 3 year deals with big backend salaries that the team can move on from or pay.

[run pMc]

First of all, higher character more "Packer type" guys won't do that. Secondly, if they are still worth keeping in those later years, you can restructure/kick the can down the road again, placate the guy with a nice bonus, and do it all again. Think Aaron Jones in both cases.

Maybe Rodgers can decide to be one of your Packer People and redo his contract so it doesn't hurt the team.

[texaspackerbacker]

Arguably that's what his current contract is. Presumably, if/when he restructures again, the whiners and detractors will AGAIN show the same rotten lack of appreciation. Yeah, they seem to be justified by the overall badness, including but certainly not limited to Rodgers last season, but just wait and see. If Rodgers plays great this season, I bet a lot of the shitheadedness will continue in here.

[run pMc]

Yes let's appreciate a $50M QB who can't crack the top 10 in most metrics (basic or advanced), especially since we've never appreciated him before.

Appreciation? That's what we do most games, and that's what the $300M they've already paid him, and a future spot in the HOF and Packers HOF is.

He's been appreciated plenty. Trading a player doesn't mean you don't appreciate them... just that they aren't a fit on your team anymore. Those are two different things.

I suspect you were booing Rodgers and screaming about them getting rid of an "unappreciated" Favre. Doubt you'd admit it either way.

[Bretsky]

Arguably that's what his current contract is. Presumably, if/when he restructures again, the whiners and detractors will AGAIN show the same rotten lack of appreciation. Yeah, they seem to be justified by the overall badness, including but certainly not limited to Rodgers last season, but just wait and see. If Rodgers plays great this season, I bet a lot of the shitheadedness will continue in here.


Rodgers wasn't worth 50 million the way he played last year; I suspect he'll come out bitter this year and will be worth that amount. But we don't need to show him love; he's not giving us a deal. We are paying him what he's worth, ASSUMING he plays much bettter than he did last year. He won't give us a deal; that's not him. He might push money out, but he's never taking a pay cut imo

[texaspackerbacker]

Yes let's appreciate a $50M QB who can't crack the top 10 in most metrics (basic or advanced), especially since we've never appreciated him before.

Appreciation? That's what we do most games, and that's what the $300M they've already paid him, and a future spot in the HOF and Packers HOF is.

He's been appreciated plenty. Trading a player doesn't mean you don't appreciate them... just that they aren't a fit on your team anymore. Those are two different things.

I suspect you were booing Rodgers and screaming about them getting rid of an "unappreciated" Favre. Doubt you'd admit it either way.

First of all, I suspect those "metrics" are flawed - not valuing enough avoiding interceptions. Secondly, the injury and the inexperience at WR are obviously the primary causes of the downturn. 3rd, I saw greatness in Rodgers very early. Yes, I was conflicted about keeping Favre or not, but certainly not to the extent of "booing" Rodgers. Favre showed obvious signs of decline that IMO Rodgers has not. Fourthly, it was a different league back then - QBs took a beating a lot more than now with the rules, etc., which allow playing longer.

No, advocating trading him doesn't necessarily mean not appreciating him. It more likely means not appreciating winning a LOT of games, which almost certainly will go on with him and end without him.

This figure of "$50M QB" gets thrown around. It ain't as simple as 150 divded by 3. What counts (and is ironic because so many in here are "cap hypocrites") is his cap number which was extremely low last year and will be way less than $50M this year. When I say he has a team friendly contract, THAT is what I mean. That contract is also the reason why he won't get traded (RG, you're dead wrong about that) and he almost certainly won't retire. And as for the badness/consequences at the end of it, even that can be spread out/kicked down the road.

[bobblehead]

Gutes has tipped his hand a bit about converting Douglas to safety. I don't think that thought popped up out of thin air. With Savage being inadequate and relegated to the slot and very little in the draft it makes sense. Especially in a draft that is way deep at CB. Don't be shocked if Gutes takes a CB in the first for the 3rd time in his tenure.

[bobblehead]

delete....wrong thread

[sharpe1027]

Rodgers cap situation suggests either try one more year and rebuild or trade now. His cap hit balloons to $40M and $60M the following two years.

[texaspackerbacker]

That suggests win with Rodgers this season, then restructure next season to reduce the cap number - kicking the can down the road, and then win several more seasons with him, kinda like the Patriots and Buccaneers did with Brady. After that, who knows. Maybe we really do swallow the bitter pill whatever number of years from now, or more likely the cap gets mitigated and either we settle into just being mediocre like most other teams or else Vince pulls some strings up there and we get a third GOAT.

[sharpe1027]

After last year's performance, they might not think they're in a position to win with Rodgers this year.

[Bretsky]

That suggests win with Rodgers this season, then restructure next season to reduce the cap number - kicking the can down the road, and then win several more seasons with him, kinda like the Patriots and Buccaneers did with Brady. After that, who knows. Maybe we really do swallow the bitter pill whatever number of years from now, or more likely the cap gets mitigated and either we settle into just being mediocre like most other teams or else Vince pulls some strings up there and we get a third GOAT.


If you bring Rodgers back it was a good decision if you win a Super Bowl. IF we can't win a Super Bowl, I'm ready to swallow the bitter pill now.

I'd go a step further. I would have no issue trading AROD for a "2024 first and second round pick.

See what they have in Love, make sure he's our furture, and if he isn't you have 2 firsts in 2024 when the draft is loaded with QB prospects

[Bretsky]

After last year's performance, they might not think they're in a position to win with Rodgers this year.


After last year's performance I'm sure they wished they would have sent him to Denver for the ransom they paid for Russ

[run pMc]

After last year's performance I'm sure they wished they would have sent him to Denver for the ransom they paid for Russ

Oh, you mean finding out if Jordan Love is a good-enough QB, and having 4 picks inside the top 45?

Yeah, I bet that 8-9 record including falling flat in a win-and-in final game was worth it.

[bobblehead]

That suggests win with Rodgers this season, then restructure next season to reduce the cap number - kicking the can down the road, and then win several more seasons with him, kinda like the Patriots and Buccaneers did with Brady. After that, who knows. Maybe we really do swallow the bitter pill whatever number of years from now, or more likely the cap gets mitigated and either we settle into just being mediocre like most other teams or else Vince pulls some strings up there and we get a third GOAT.

The can has already been kicked. At this point the first 30 mil is just kicking further. Anything more than that is causing even bigger future problems.

[RashanGary]

The can has already been kicked. At this point the first 30 mil is just kicking further. Anything more than that is causing even bigger future problems.

Right. At this point you kick the can again and you just make up for what was already spent. There is an advantage the first couple years you kick the can, but once you get to the spot where it’s already kicked, you lose the advantage because you’re already paying for past years.

[texaspackerbacker]

The can has already been kicked. At this point the first 30 mil is just kicking further. Anything more than that is causing even bigger future problems.

The term "kicking it down the road" pretty much implies that it has been done before. Of course, it can be done over and over and over. An of course, it won't be a significant future problem considering the cap increase, etc.

[Fritz]

Tex must live in a McMansion, drives a Porsche, has a Land Rover in the garage, couple of collectible Corvettes, a ski boat, a fishing boat, and horses and a barn on the five-hundred-acre property he's got.

And Tex is probably retired, living on social security and his little IRA account.

But he can kick all the cans down the road - just transfers that credit card balance, over and over, to another credit card company.

Not to worry, though. His social security is going up by 8% this year, and his IRA is doing well - he's making 6% on that.

[texaspackerbacker]

You should have the balls to show up in FYI. I'm an open book there. What you posted has definite political implications, and I'm not gonna get myself suspended by replying to it here.

[run pMc]

I see nothing political in the comments. I do see economic in them though. Plenty of McMansions occupied by those of all political stripes.

[texaspackerbacker]

I shall not be tempted except to say, economics IS political. Anybody with the balls to participate in FYI knows that.

[bobblehead]

Tex must live in a McMansion, drives a Porsche, has a Land Rover in the garage, couple of collectible Corvettes, a ski boat, a fishing boat, and horses and a barn on the five-hundred-acre property he's got.

And Tex is probably retired, living on social security and his little IRA account.

But he can kick all the cans down the road - just transfers that credit card balance, over and over, to another credit card company.

Not to worry, though. His social security is going up by 8% this year, and his IRA is doing well - he's making 6% on that.

Tex got 6% last year? Damn, can you put me in touch with his guy? Yea, yea. Politics (according to tex). Fritz and I are making a joke. Neither has anything to do with politics tex. Don't get your panties in an uproar (now if we debate whether you are a girl or a boy because you wear panties, THAT is probably politics). Either way I don't judge. At your age if you aren't wearing depends I'm impressed.

[texaspackerbacker]

I covered this, actually got a little carried away, in FYI.

[call_me_ishmael]

Did the Packers tag Yosh Njiman or whatever his name is, the tackle that is mysteriously both really good and really bad concurrently?

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Did the Packers tag Yosh Njiman or whatever his name is, the tackle that is mysteriously both really good and really bad concurrently?

Nijman’s a RFA. No need for the tag.

[run pMc]

Did the Packers tag Yosh Njiman or whatever his name is, the tackle that is mysteriously both really good and really bad concurrently?

Not yet, but it's expected they'll put a R2 tender on him, so it'll be a 1 year $3-4M deal that another team can match or beat, but they give up a R2 pick if Njiman signs it. It's a win-win: either cheap one year deal for a starting RT, or a 2nd round pick you can use.

[Fritz]

You should have the balls to show up in FYI. I'm an open book there. What you posted has definite political implications, and I'm not gonna get myself suspended by replying to it here.

Come on Tex. It was a commentary on Rodgers's situation and the salary cap and how you view the cap. It wasn't political.

[texaspackerbacker]

I stated in FYI why it was.

[call_me_ishmael]

Seattle is going to be a problem going forward. With how bad Denver sucked this year, they have some premium draft spots this year and already are a QB away. Kinda wondering why ARod isn't angling to go there too.

[Joemailman]

Seattle is going to be a problem going forward. With how bad Denver sucked this year, they have some premium draft spots this year and already are a QB away. Kinda wondering why ARod isn't angling to go there too.

Seattle and Geno Smith agreed to a 3 year 105 million extension.

[run pMc]

Seattle and Geno Smith agreed to a 3 year 105 million extension.

That, plus Pete Carroll is the big dog there, plus they just got rid of their own crazy QB a year ago... why get an older model? They got into the playoffs with Geno AND have picks to work with.

[call_me_ishmael]

Seattle and Geno Smith agreed to a 3 year 105 million extension.

Right but a week ago that wasn't a thing. Surely ARod has been working these angles for awhile. I doubt the 'hawks view Geno as the long term guy.

[call_me_ishmael]

That, plus Pete Carroll is the big dog there, plus they just got rid of their own crazy QB a year ago... why get an older model? They got into the playoffs with Geno AND have picks to work with.

Trade their crazy, get copious picks to reload, then get an even bigger crazy but great player for a year or two when they're reloaded to go for it.

[Fritz]

What I want to know is how did SF get THREE THIRD ROUND compensatory picks for something to do with diversity? What is that all about?

[Joemailman]

What I want to know is how did SF get THREE THIRD ROUND compensatory picks for something to do with diversity? What is that all about?


The 37 compensatory picks include five special selections that were awarded at the end of the third round to teams that have had a minority employee hired as a head coach or primary football executive by another club. Three of those picks were awarded to San Francisco. The special compensatory picks were instituted as an amendment to the 2020 Collective Bargaining Agreement in an effort to promote equal employment opportunities within NFL teams..

[run pMc]

It's called having good coaches and coordinators (ex. DeMeco Ryans), something GB is iffy at lately.

(cough, Joe Barry, Maurice Drayton, cough)

[bobblehead]

What I want to know is how did SF get THREE THIRD ROUND compensatory picks for something to do with diversity? What is that all about?

FYI topic fritz. Sadley we can't have a sane discussion here. Step on over and ask again.

[Fritz]

I just wanted to know how they got the three picks, and Joe answered the question. The picks seem kinda high, but so it goes. If that's how the NFL is going to go (no political stance, just an observation about Packer football), then maybe MLF and Guter should work on hiring more/better minority coaches and execs so they can get in on some of these third round picks. Oh wait - the Packers can't pick for shit in the third round. Never mind. Maybe they can get some slightly-above-average minority coaches and execs, and get some fourth rounders. I'm not talking politics, I'm talking about a way for Green Bay to get more draft picks here.

Different topic: Given that the Packers restructured Bakh and didn't add void years, I wonder if they're getting ready to suck it up and take the cap hits for all the players Gutes extended his credit card for - maybe go into sudden rebuild mode for two years, try to get out of the cap hole, and load up for Jordan Love Year Three As Starter, or maybe if he doesn't work out, just try to draft your next guy in the next two years?

[red]

panthers just traded up with the bears for the #1 pick

bears get

2-1sts (panthers have #9 overall)
2-seconds

and DJ moore

imo, very smart move by the bears

[RashanGary]

panthers just traded up with the bears for the #1 pick

bears get

2-1sts (panthers have #9 overall)
2-seconds

and DJ moore

imo, very smart move by the bears

For sure. DJ Moore is a hell of a player. Wonder if he’s a head case cuz trading him is kinda weird.

[red]

For sure. DJ Moore is a hell of a player. Wonder if he’s a head case cuz trading him is kinda weird.

they took a hell of a cap hit to get rim of him too

they must be going into full rebuild mode, get rid of everyone thats gonna cost them money the next few years

[run pMc]

Good grief the Bears did well in that trade.

[MadScientist]

I hate it when the Bears do intelligent things. Hopefully they will return to form when they actually make the selections.

[Fritz]

Guess that means the Panthers are out of the Aaron Rodgers Sweepstakes. You don't give up that much juice for the #1 overall unless you're drafting a QB. At least I don't think you do.

[ThunderDan]

panthers just traded up with the bears for the #1 pick

bears get

2-1sts (panthers have #9 overall)
2-seconds

and DJ moore

imo, very smart move by the bears

Making up for the Turdbisket trade which crippled them for years.

[Jaire]

Have these massive trade-ups ever worked? I can't think of an example..... I guess Justin Fields is still undetermined.

Carolina is on a fire sale. Also, something I haven't seen in a while: Houston vibes.

[RashanGary]

We don’t know what dj moore is like in the lockerroom. It’s a head scratcher to get rid of him. He put up really good numbers with bad quarterbacks. It wouldn’t surprise me if he has a 10k yard career. He lit it up from day 1.

[Fritz]

Did the old Bears' GM Ryan Pace get hired in Carolina? Smells like one of his moves, to mortgage your franchise for a top pick in the year there is no clear-cut, definitive, franchise-making QB.

[run pMc]

Frank Reich is the new HC, maybe he's got guys he wants and doesn't. There were some trade rumors last year when CMC got traded, but still surprised they'd deal DJ Moore. If you're drafting a QB you want to surround him with talent.
I sure hope the Bears find a way to mess it up lol

They didn't have a lot of talent on their roster, those picks (plus their cap space) sure will help change that. It does signal that they plan to go with Fields at QB.

[Jaire]

lol. I didn't really put together Frank Reich and Carolina in my mind.... that makes sense after his merry go round QB disaster in Indy.

[bobblehead]

So if you have been saying the cap don't matter and just look at the Rams who made the moves necessary to win an owl I would say look at the Rams now.

No draft capital, in cap hell, McVay almost retired, but decided losing for $14M a year would be worth it. Dumping Ramsey, trying to dump Allen Robinson and coming off a horrible season.

But the Saints!! Well, they never actually won the owl, and they haven't been very good for a few years now. In a desperate attempt to have a winning record they just gave another teams cast off $37.5M a year.

Gutes needs to right the cap. At least we haven't traded away all of our draft capital (actually improving it thru Adams and Rodgers). He put the heir apparent in place a few seasons ago. Although we can't sign any real outside talent, we should be able to keep most of our own.

Because we blew our load, we won't be in the run for an Owl for the next 2 seasons (even if we keep Rodgers). But if we spend the next 2 aquiring/developing young talent and right the cap, we might be right back in the conversation pretty quick.

[run pMc]

So if you have been saying the cap don't matter and just look at the Rams who made the moves necessary to win an owl I would say look at the Rams now.

No draft capital, in cap hell, McVay almost retired, but decided losing for $14M a year would be worth it. Dumping Ramsey, trying to dump Allen Robinson and coming off a horrible season.

But the Saints!! Well, they never actually won the owl, and they haven't been very good for a few years now. In a desperate attempt to have a winning record they just gave another teams cast off $37.5M a year.

Gutes needs to right the cap. At least we haven't traded away all of our draft capital (actually improving it thru Adams and Rodgers). He put the heir apparent in place a few seasons ago. Although we can't sign any real outside talent, we should be able to keep most of our own.

Because we blew our load, we won't be in the run for an Owl for the next 2 seasons (even if we keep Rodgers). But if we spend the next 2 aquiring/developing young talent and right the cap, we might be right back in the conversation pretty quick.

Agree. My guess is they think the window with Rodgers is closed and they are looking at when the next window will open, presumably with Jordan Love.
I'm all for using cap space, but not a fan of mortgaging the future to do it. If you asked me if I'd go thru 3-5 years of losing and cap hell for a Super Bowl win, I could be talked into it. That's a lot of agony for one year of victory though.

I think GB generally do a good job of keeping their own players and restructuring rather than releasing players to keep under the cap. I think the Rodgers extension and Bakhtiari contract both were killers though. It's tough to have a number of players be the highest paid at their positions and field a good roster with depth...especially when those high earning players are on the wrong side of 30.

Last year's draft class looks like a good one.
This year's draft isn't great, but they have a chance to improve in some weaker parts of the roster, and if they draft and develop well they could slingshot back into contention.

[red]

So if you have been saying the cap don't matter and just look at the Rams who made the moves necessary to win an owl I would say look at the Rams now.

No draft capital, in cap hell, McVay almost retired, but decided losing for $14M a year would be worth it. Dumping Ramsey, trying to dump Allen Robinson and coming off a horrible season.

But the Saints!! Well, they never actually won the owl, and they haven't been very good for a few years now. In a desperate attempt to have a winning record they just gave another teams cast off $37.5M a year.

Gutes needs to right the cap. At least we haven't traded away all of our draft capital (actually improving it thru Adams and Rodgers). He put the heir apparent in place a few seasons ago. Although we can't sign any real outside talent, we should be able to keep most of our own.

Because we blew our load, we won't be in the run for an Owl for the next 2 seasons (even if we keep Rodgers). But if we spend the next 2 aquiring/developing young talent and right the cap, we might be right back in the conversation pretty quick.

i think we went all in a couple years ago (and decided to mortgage the future. then we came close, so management said lets keep the foot on the pedal, and push everything and then some even further down the road. in fact this all might have started 3 seasons ago

at some point we are gonna have to start releasing good players, you can't just keep restructuring forever like they've been doing

we might not go into full on rebuild more (maybe we should have started that last offseason), but at some point we are gonna have 10s of millions of dollars counting against the cap, which is gonna keep us from signing 4 or 5 guys that we might desperately need to get any better

thats why it might be a good idea to take rodgers full hit now and get rid of any other dead weight, have one shit year, and then lets go. the problem is, we are already screwing with guys contracts just so we can get rid of rodgers, so it could be an ugly 2 or 3 years, just because we kept trying to go all in

[oldbutnotdeadyet]

i think we went all in a couple years ago (and decided to mortgage the future. then we came close, so management said lets keep the foot on the pedal, and push everything and then some even further down the road. in fact this all might have started 3 seasons ago

at some point we are gonna have to start releasing good players, you can't just keep restructuring forever like they've been doing

we might not go into full on rebuild more (maybe we should have started that last offseason), but at some point we are gonna have 10s of millions of dollars counting against the cap, which is gonna keep us from signing 4 or 5 guys that we might desperately need to get any better

thats why it might be a good idea to take rodgers full hit now and get rid of any other dead weight, have one shit year, and then lets go. the problem is, we are already screwing with guys contracts just so we can get rid of rodgers, so it could be an ugly 2 or 3 years, just because we kept trying to go all in

I wish they would just announce it already. I agree trade should have happened last year, but we blew it. Time to cut the cord and move on..

[Jaire]

I'm not so pessimistic. Last year was a good haul in a deep draft class. A lot will ride on the success of that class.

If AR is traded, it will be tight this year, but we don't have any major holes on this team. Next year, cap will be clear and it should go up a lot too -- that's why I think a lot of teams are pushing money to the future. This last year was rocky with so many injuries and young players on the Oline and WR, but we have enough players there for next year at least. The defense did not play to expectations but pieces are there. My biggest want is resigning Nixon next year tbh. He gives us a boost we haven't had in a long long time.

Everything this year will be Jordan Love. The season hinges on his play.

[sharpe1027]

I think they can do well with Love being relatively average, but playing within the system.

[Fritz]

Lots of shit is going to hit the fan this coming week: Rodgers's decision, if Nijman will be tendered, if the team is going to make any serious effort to re-sign Tonyan or Lazard, if they can keep Nixon, and so on. Things are finally going to start happening.

[Jaire]

Nixon definitely seems steep (but that contract is in the details). Still glad they signed him. He was my number 1 (Yosh is number 2).

[texaspackerbacker]

Yeah, glad to hear they kept Nixon.

[call_me_ishmael]

Lotta people rip on the Rams blowing it up but has there been a better team the past like 6 years or so? Seems like they've been pretty damn good despite a not-so-great QB the whole time. I would gladly take that run and cap it off with a SB and tear it down - who wouldn't?

They have been more successful by any metric than the Packers the past 6 years or so, so that's cool with me.

[texaspackerbacker]

I sure as hell wouldn't! Give me consistent winning any day over the stupidity of tearing down to rebuild, even if they had a Super Bowl mixed in. They have won 5, 12, 10, 9, 13, and 11 the past six years, and that's sort of cherry picking, as before that they won an average of just 4.2 wins over the previous ten years. That compares to the Packers 8, 13, 13, 13, 6, and 7 over those same six years. And of course, the Packers averaged 10.6 wins over the previous ten years.

What metric were you using? hahahaha

[call_me_ishmael]

Super bowls titles and appearances. Very special run for them.

[call_me_ishmael]

Lazard 4 years 44 M from Jets, 22M gauranteed. Gosh, I would not pay him that. Totally not worth it.

[ThunderDan]

Lazard 4 years 44 M from Jets, 22M gauranteed. Gosh, I would not pay him that. Totally not worth it.

That's a shocker. Never thought he was worth WR 3 money.

[run pMc]

That's a shocker. Never thought he was worth WR 3 money.

LOL
Sounds like a lot of money, but it's in line with what he was projected to get. MVS got 3/30 last year.

This sure makes it look like that AR trade is happening.

[QBME]

LOL
Sounds like a lot of money, but it's in line with what he was projected to get. MVS got 3/30 last year.

This sure makes it look like that AR trade is happening.

Whats Gute gonna get fer it?

[Fritz]

A spanking?

[King Friday]

Lazard is a #3 WR at best. The kid is a hell of a blocker, but you could draft a blocking WR in the 7th round. Good for him getting paid…better still that it isn’t Green Bay paying that contract.

[King Friday]

I’ll take SB titles over 17-0 regular seasons each and every day. The Vince Lombardi Trophy is the only thing that truly matters. Every thing else is practice, as Allen Iverson would say.

[run pMc]

I’ll take SB titles over 17-0 regular seasons each and every day. The Vince Lombardi Trophy is the only thing that truly matters. Every thing else is practice, as Allen Iverson would say.

Agree. Most probably find the 2010 season more satisfying and memorable than the 2015 season.

Some early predictions are that Lazard would net them a R5 compensatory pick (assuming GB doesn't sign any FAs to a similar deal).

[run pMc]

Jarren Reed signing with his former team (Seahawks). 2 years, up to 10.8M (presumably lots of incentives).

Meh. He was... ok? ... last year. Had some real highlight plays and then disappeared for weeks. Wyatt and TJ Slaton are going to (or should) be getting more snaps anyway.

One interesting note: expiring contracts that contained void years (like Reed’s) do not count toward the compensatory pick formula. Not sure his would have qualified for more than a R7 pick anyway.

[Fritz]

Guess they’ll be drafting at least two defensive linemen. They barely have enough bodies on the line to run a practice, much less play in a game. Holy hell.

[bobblehead]

Lotta people rip on the Rams blowing it up but has there been a better team the past like 6 years or so? Seems like they've been pretty damn good despite a not-so-great QB the whole time. I would gladly take that run and cap it off with a SB and tear it down - who wouldn't?

They have been more successful by any metric than the Packers the past 6 years or so, so that's cool with me.

Anyone would take that run WITH an Owl. The problem is that is not a lock to win one. We sold out....almost as much as the Rams. We fell short.

[Bretsky]

Our MVP’s performance in those losses were pathetic

[Joemailman]

Anyone would take that run WITH an Owl. The problem is that is not a lock to win one. We sold out....almost as much as the Rams. We fell short.

I agree. If Jaquiski Tartt doesn't drop an easy interception from Stafford in the 4th quarter in the NFCCG, the Rams are just another team that went all in and fell short.

[texaspackerbacker]

I didn't think anybody would pay Lazard that much. Oh well. Good for him, bad for the Jets - especially if Rodgers does not get traded there.

[Bretsky]

I didn't think anybody would pay Lazard that much. Oh well. Good for him, bad for the Jets - especially if Rodgers does not get traded there.


While Aaron is a really good QB, the Jets should have seen last year that Karen the GM is really shitty

Nice job overpaying the Lizard, but glad to got some big ching. He was a good guy and good teammate

[call_me_ishmael]

I'm not a big fan of how the Packers continue to push money off and go "all in" this year. I would much rather that they pay the piper this year, get in a healthy cap position, sorta stink and get some high draft picks, then go for it in 2025.

[MadtownPacker]

I didn't think anybody would pay Lazard that much. Oh well. Good for him, bad for the Jets - especially if Rodgers does not get traded there.
If??? Man you are losing your resolve? I guess it is a done deal if you are shipping him off also.

[call_me_ishmael]

JJ Watt is going to be so, so, so good as a media guy.

[Fritz]

JJ Watt is going to be so, so, so good as a media guy.

Goddamn shithead media puke.

[call_me_ishmael]

Goddamn shithead media puke.

I was listening to him subbing in for AJ Hawk on McAfee and he is way better than Hawk IMO. It's probably easier to show up one time and do it but JJ comes off as so genuine and at least in tune with normal people and the lavish lifestyle these guys are able to live after earning big bucks. In short, for a very rich guy, he is relatable. I think he will be an elite broadcaster in short order and make some serious cashola doing it.

[Fritz]

I was listening to him subbing in for AJ Hawk on McAfee and he is way better than Hawk IMO. It's probably easier to show up one time and do it but JJ comes off as so genuine and at least in tune with normal people and the lavish lifestyle these guys are able to live after earning big bucks. In short, for a very rich guy, he is relatable. I think he will be an elite broadcaster in short order and make some serious cashola doing it.

So you're not buying my Tex imitation?

[texaspackerbacker]

Is that your definition of media guy/puke? It ain't mine for the most part anyway. Most of the REAL media shitheads never played pro sports and are definitely NOT real or normal or genuine or whatever J J Watt is getting called. I didn't see him, so I don't know if he is like that or not, but it's very believable that he might be - the good things I mean.

[Fritz]

Is that your definition of media guy/puke? It ain't mine for the most part anyway. Most of the REAL media shitheads never played pro sports and are definitely NOT real or normal or genuine or whatever J J Watt is getting called. I didn't see him, so I don't know if he is like that or not, but it's very believable that he might be - the good things I mean.

So someone who has never been a reporter or been trained as a media person, but has been a pro athlete who's wealthier than all the PackerRats put together is more believable and more credible and more "normal"that professional reporters who make about as much as APB?

Okay. Just trying to understand your world, Tex.

[ThunderDan]

So someone who has never been a reporter or been trained as a media person, but has been a pro athlete who's wealthier than all the PackerRats put together is more believable and more credible and more "normal"that professional reporters who make about as much as APB?

Okay. Just trying to understand your world, Tex.

He goes up a bunch because he went to the UW. If he went to Miami Tex would call him names also.

[texaspackerbacker]

So someone who has never been a reporter or been trained as a media person, but has been a pro athlete who's wealthier than all the PackerRats put together is more believable and more credible and more "normal"that professional reporters who make about as much as APB?

Okay. Just trying to understand your world, Tex.

Even though their stupid-assed opinions aren't worth shit, I suspect those media bastards make a helluv a lot more than APB or any of us in here, with maybe a couple of exceptions. If those assholes stuck to digging up actual facts, they might not be so bad, but their whole existence is speculation, opinions disguised as fact, and worst of all, an agenda of stirring up trouble. Somehow, I don't think J.J. Watt will be like that.

My world? My world is about enjoying life, a large part of which is seeing my favorite teams WIN. And I hate it when something could happen to blow that all up - like Rodgers going somewhere else, as well as shitheads actually WANTING that rottenness of losing to happen. Can you understand that? Or are you part of the problem? Most of your posts say the latter.

[Fritz]

Even though their stupid-assed opinions aren't worth shit, I suspect those media bastards make a helluv a lot more than APB or any of us in here, with maybe a couple of exceptions. If those assholes stuck to digging up actual facts, they might not be so bad, but their whole existence is speculation, opinions disguised as fact, and worst of all, an agenda of stirring up trouble. Somehow, I don't think J.J. Watt will be like that.

My world? My world is about enjoying life, a large part of which is seeing my favorite teams WIN. And I hate it when something could happen to blow that all up - like Rodgers going somewhere else, as well as shitheads actually WANTING that rottenness of losing to happen. Can you understand that? Or are you part of the problem? Most of your posts say the latter.

Alright, Tex. You're a fucking pig-headed idiot if you think that there are Packer fans who actually want the team to lose. I don't think anyone here wants this team to lose. Don't be so fucking simplistic.

There are people - and yes, I am one of them - who for different reasons are ready to move on from Rodgers. Some think his play is simply declining and it's useless to keep trying with him. Others don't like the guy. Some are just tired of the off-season drama. Some are not happy that he'd begun to exert control over player acquisition and retention. Some just want to see a new era. For some, it's a combination of the above.

And those who are ready to move on to Love - or to whomever - recognize that in the short term, the team might not do quite as well. But they are willing to live with Jordan Love as QB and the team going, say, 7 - 10, as opposed to having Rodgers one more year and going 8 - 9. That's what many people think the difference is. They could be wrong, sure. Or are there two more years with Rodgers scuffling along? Those people think Love might be good, and that 6 - 11 or 7 - 10 could be followed by some bright, successful years. Others think maybe Love will suck, and the team will tank, but that this could lead to a high draft pick and a shot at the next great Green Bay QB.

Your first premise - with Rodgers it's going to be great, without him they're going to be horrible for god knows how long - is just your opinion. It's not a fact, despite what you may believe. Your second premise, based on the first, that people who do not want Rodgers back therefore want the Packers to be horrible - is just wrong.

So if it's possible, stop calling people names because they've shaken up your world a little bit. I'm sorry your happiness seems so dependent upon the world, especially the Packer world, needing to look the way you want it to look.

[run pMc]

Agree that I want GB to win, and maybe they won't win 13 games, but I don't think they were going to win 11 games next year with Rodgers.
Yes, next season might have more losses than wins, but it will be a chance to see something new, without the expectations for Super Bowl contention...and the subsequent crushing (playoff?) loss. The games will be more unpredictable.

The Packers didn't crack .500 with Rodgers as their QB until he'd played 29 games. It's going to take a bit of patience with JL, but they have a nucleus of young players who can keep them from being as bad as last season's Bears.

I will be cheering for GB to win.

Haven't heard JJ Watt. Some ex-players are dopes, some are smart with good opinions. I don't think non-players who are credentialed reporters like Tom Silverstein are media pukes. Matt Schneidmann at the Athletic is decent, Bill Huber at SI... again, these are credentialed reporters who have editors and fact-checkers.
Skip Bayless or Colin Cowherd fall more into the media puke category for me, and I don't pay attention to them. They aren't 'reporting' anything factual unless someone else has already broken the story.
I don't know who Tex is calling a puke, it's all a vague generalization, or maybe it's just him stereotyping everyone as a puke, which is a helluva way to go (ignorantly) thru life.

[texaspackerbacker]

Alright, Tex. You're a fucking pig-headed idiot if you think that there are Packer fans who actually want the team to lose. I don't think anyone here wants this team to lose. Don't be so fucking simplistic.

There are people - and yes, I am one of them - who for different reasons are ready to move on from Rodgers. Some think his play is simply declining and it's useless to keep trying with him. Others don't like the guy. Some are just tired of the off-season drama. Some are not happy that he'd begun to exert control over player acquisition and retention. Some just want to see a new era. For some, it's a combination of the above.

And those who are ready to move on to Love - or to whomever - recognize that in the short term, the team might not do quite as well. But they are willing to live with Jordan Love as QB and the team going, say, 7 - 10, as opposed to having Rodgers one more year and going 8 - 9. That's what many people think the difference is. They could be wrong, sure. Or are there two more years with Rodgers scuffling along? Those people think Love might be good, and that 6 - 11 or 7 - 10 could be followed by some bright, successful years. Others think maybe Love will suck, and the team will tank, but that this could lead to a high draft pick and a shot at the next great Green Bay QB.

Your first premise - with Rodgers it's going to be great, without him they're going to be horrible for god knows how long - is just your opinion. It's not a fact, despite what you may believe. Your second premise, based on the first, that people who do not want Rodgers back therefore want the Packers to be horrible - is just wrong.

So if it's possible, stop calling people names because they've shaken up your world a little bit. I'm sorry your happiness seems so dependent upon the world, especially the Packer world, needing to look the way you want it to look.

What's undeniable is that there are plenty of Packer fans, and a lot bigger percentage in here than in general, who want WHAT ABSOLUTELY WILL CAUSE LOSING FOOTBALL - stupidly getting rid of Rodgers. Yeah, I doubt many or any who claim to be Packer fans want the team to lose, but I read this idiocy about moving on or whatever, and it's clear that a lot of people are damn dumb enough to want THE CAUSE of that losing football.

[texaspackerbacker]

Agree that I want GB to win, and maybe they won't win 13 games, but I don't think they were going to win 11 games next year with Rodgers.
Yes, next season might have more losses than wins, but it will be a chance to see something new, without the expectations for Super Bowl contention...and the subsequent crushing (playoff?) loss. The games will be more unpredictable.

The Packers didn't crack .500 with Rodgers as their QB until he'd played 29 games. It's going to take a bit of patience with JL, but they have a nucleus of young players who can keep them from being as bad as last season's Bears.

I will be cheering for GB to win.

Haven't heard JJ Watt. Some ex-players are dopes, some are smart with good opinions. I don't think non-players who are credentialed reporters like Tom Silverstein are media pukes. Matt Schneidmann at the Athletic is decent, Bill Huber at SI... again, these are credentialed reporters who have editors and fact-checkers.
Skip Bayless or Colin Cowherd fall more into the media puke category for me, and I don't pay attention to them. They aren't 'reporting' anything factual unless someone else has already broken the story.
I don't know who Tex is calling a puke, it's all a vague generalization, or maybe it's just him stereotyping everyone as a puke, which is a helluva way to go (ignorantly) thru life.

Obviously, I will be cheering for the Packers to win too, just not expecting it - and I'd be extremely pleased to be wrong about the Packers being as good with Love as they would be/have been over the years with Rodgers. Just typing that, though makes me think, no way.

I haven't heard Watt either. I can't think of many former players who are dopes, Aikman maybe but he's the only one that comes to mind. McAfee? No, he's way better than just about anybody who hasn't been a player. I have a weakness, I guess: when I read articles - which I do a LOT even though I hate the content and the writers, I seldom look at the byline. Silverstein obviously I've heard of, your other "good" examples not so much, but I really haven't paid attention whether they are the ones writing the worst of the shit or not ...... and don't get me started about God damned "fact checkers", or there could be bans. I tend to lump them all as "media pukes" as a default until proven otherwise - which hardly ever happens. And you didn't address the FACT at least I see it as a fact that those bastards, probably even the "good" ones see it as their sick role in life to stir up trouble.

[run pMc]

I think some reporters do like to stir the pot. I think McGinn was that way, at least with his opinion pieces. When he stuck to analysis he was much better. I'm not a big fan of opinion pieces anyway.
Not everyone is a muckraker. Investigative journalism does and has played an important role, in the US and around the world.

Fact-checking is very important. Like you, I'm not interested in getting banned, but let's just say there's a certain large news outlet that didn't maintain tight enough editorial control or have its personalities stick to facts enough, and it's got them tangled up in some nasty legal trouble that could be financially crippling for them.

One thing about sports reporting -- the big national guys like Schefter will get the big scoops because they are coming from the agent and they want exposure. The real good, interesting nuggets IMO come from the local guys who are in the building every day and talking to everyone, even the assistant equipment manager and the goings on. They're more likely to be plugged in to what people are really thinking inside the building.

[Fritz]

What's undeniable is that there are plenty of Packer fans, and a lot bigger percentage in here than in general, who want WHAT ABSOLUTELY WILL CAUSE LOSING FOOTBALL - stupidly getting rid of Rodgers. Yeah, I doubt many or any who claim to be Packer fans want the team to lose, but I read this idiocy about moving on or whatever, and it's clear that a lot of people are damn dumb enough to want THE CAUSE of that losing football.

You are convinced that if Rodgers isn't the quarterback, chaos and disaster will reign. That may happen, but it's not a fact. Unless you live in the multiverse, and if so, then there are other constructs that also exist - Rodgers sucks next year and the Packers look promising, Rodgers is mediocre with the Jets and so is Love with the Packers, and on and on. "Absolutely will cause losing football" is just a strong opinion, nothing more.

[texaspackerbacker]

Chaos and disaster, I don't know, but LOSING at the minimum more than half of the time, hell yeah. And granted, that's a "strong opinion", but just watch, it's gonna be a correct opinion - and I'd love to be wrong about that. What I'd love a lot more is for it all to be moot because Rodgers is still the Packers QB in '24 and beyond. I'm not holding my breath, though.

[texaspackerbacker]

I think some reporters do like to stir the pot. I think McGinn was that way, at least with his opinion pieces. When he stuck to analysis he was much better. I'm not a big fan of opinion pieces anyway.
Not everyone is a muckraker. Investigative journalism does and has played an important role, in the US and around the world.

Fact-checking is very important. Like you, I'm not interested in getting banned, but let's just say there's a certain large news outlet that didn't maintain tight enough editorial control or have its personalities stick to facts enough, and it's got them tangled up in some nasty legal trouble that could be financially crippling for them.

One thing about sports reporting -- the big national guys like Schefter will get the big scoops because they are coming from the agent and they want exposure. The real good, interesting nuggets IMO come from the local guys who are in the building every day and talking to everyone, even the assistant equipment manager and the goings on. They're more likely to be plugged in to what people are really thinking inside the building.

I'm NOT gonna mention where I'm gonna start a new thread about God damned media shitheads because we aren't supposed to even mention that supposed to be unknown paradise of a different kind of posting.

[sharpe1027]

Chaos and disaster, I don't know, but LOSING at the minimum more than half of the time, hell yeah. And granted, that's a "strong opinion", but just watch, it's gonna be a correct opinion - and I'd love to be wrong about that. What I'd love a lot more is for it all to be moot because Rodgers is still the Packers QB in '24 and beyond. I'm not holding my breath, though.

Oh! Just like your strong opinion that neither the Packers or Rodgers would consider a trade?

[bobblehead]

What's undeniable is that there are plenty of Packer fans, and a lot bigger percentage in here than in general, who want WHAT ABSOLUTELY WILL CAUSE LOSING FOOTBALL - stupidly getting rid of Rodgers. Yeah, I doubt many or any who claim to be Packer fans want the team to lose, but I read this idiocy about moving on or whatever, and it's clear that a lot of people are damn dumb enough to want THE CAUSE of that losing football.

Didn't we just have losing football WITH Rodgers?

[texaspackerbacker]

Asked and answered - one bad year, Rodgers' own play not even all that horrible except in comparison to his own GOAT standard, the primary reasons for the badness being his own injury as well as injuries to Watson and Doubs, as well as what the new guy said, losing Adams and MVS - circumstances extremely unlikely to occur again.

[run pMc]

Didn't we just have losing football WITH Rodgers?

(checks NFL standings)
Yes, yes we did.

Also, there's not much of a historical precedent (outside of Brady) for sustained winning football with QBs hitting their 40's. Most player's performance takes a steep decline very early in their 30's, making it to their late 30's is an accomplishment in itself. Asking for more than that is asking for something at the extremes of statistical probability. Being an MVP doesn't mean you are going to play that way as you age, especially past your prime. Ask Cam Newton or Matt Ryan.

[sharpe1027]

Asked and answered - one bad year, Rodgers' own play not even all that horrible except in comparison to his own GOAT standard, the primary reasons for the badness being his own injury as well as injuries to Watson and Doubs, as well as what the new guy said, losing Adams and MVS - circumstances extremely unlikely to occur again.

He also had several average (bad for him) years before his MVP years. I think there's more to it than his thumb.

[Fritz]

Even if you buy Tex's reasoning - it wasn't Rodgers declining, it was the thumb injury and the supporting cast! (which I don't buy) - Tex's assertion that any of these circumstances are "extremely unlikely to occur again" does not take into account that Rodgers is a very old player in a young man's league who is in fact more likely to get hurt as time goes on. He's not as mobile in the pocket, for sure, and is therefore more likely to get hit and injured. One argument you could make is that Rodgers really, really needs an offensive line that can keep him clean for a long time on every play.

[Bretsky]

He also had several average (bad for him) years before his MVP years. I think there's more to it than his thumb.

if you believe attitude wise he's turned into a self absorbed Shitbag like so many do, there is that

[texaspackerbacker]

Even if you buy Tex's reasoning - it wasn't Rodgers declining, it was the thumb injury and the supporting cast! (which I don't buy) - Tex's assertion that any of these circumstances are "extremely unlikely to occur again" does not take into account that Rodgers is a very old player in a young man's league who is in fact more likely to get hurt as time goes on. He's not as mobile in the pocket, for sure, and is therefore more likely to get hit and injured. One argument you could make is that Rodgers really, really needs an offensive line that can keep him clean for a long time on every play.

I would argue, as I have for many years, that Rodgers never had an O Line that did a good job protecting. He was hurried and/or forced out of the pocket virtually every pass play his whole career. Granted he was a tad bit less mobile this past season, but not much. As for being old in a young man's league, it's NOT a young QB league. Anything Brady could do at 44, certainly Rodgers could do at 40, and probably at 41-44 too.

As for the "self-absorbed shitbag" stuff, I would say that's about 98% the creation of media pukes. There is literally no evidence of any of that toward Packer players, coaches, even fans.

[Joemailman]

I would argue, as I have for many years, that Rodgers never had an O Line that did a good job protecting. He was hurried and/or forced out of the pocket virtually every pass play his whole career. Granted he was a tad bit less mobile this past season, but not much. As for being old in a young man's league, it's NOT a young QB league. Anything Brady could do at 44, certainly Rodgers could do at 40, and probably at 41-44 too.

As for the "self-absorbed shitbag" stuff, I would say that's about 98% the creation of media pukes. There is literally no evidence of any of that toward Packer players, coaches, even fans.

Exhibit A of why most people here don't take you seriously.

[red]

i've been convinced for awhile that he either doesn't actually watch the games, or someone at the nursing home is just putting in old VHS tapes of highlights from years ago

[George Cumby]

I think it's just dementia. He is divorced from reality.

[texaspackerbacker]

Somehow, I don't think Packer fans in general - outside of this forum - are so hung up on thinking the Packers O Line has pass blocked good/unable to see pass rushers roaring in virtually every play needing to be dodged or whatever. That's in stark contrast to what Brady, Brees, and probably well over half of the QBs around the league had for pass blocking. And it happened the most from outside rushers, especially on the blind side where that sacred cow has grazed for so long.

[run pMc]

i've been convinced for awhile that he either doesn't actually watch the games, or someone at the nursing home is just putting in old VHS tapes of highlights from years ago

This is a pretty good theory. It's at least as good as any explanations or rationalizations he's put forth.

Interesting to think that GB's OL has been bad for 15 years and he's scrambling for his life all that time, when many consider his off-schedule throws and ad-libbed adjustments (which require him to run around and the OL to hold their blocks MUCH longer than other teams) to be what separates him. Oh yeah, and there's the fact that GB's OL consistently ranks in the top 10 if not top 5 of pass blocking metrics. Go watch the OL for some other teams: Cincinnati, Houston, LA (either team), or Chicago. There are a lot of teams who can barely find 3 average level starters, GB has done much better than that.

How soon some forget Sitton, Lang, Rivera, Wahle, Clifton, Tauscher, Linsley, Tretter, etc.
For giggles, go check out some of the OL's Holmgren and Wolf rolled out in the early Favre years. It's like a who's who of who's that.

[RashanGary]

This is a pretty good theory. It's at least as good as any explanations or rationalizations he's put forth.

Interesting to think that GB's OL has been bad for 15 years and he's scrambling for his life all that time, when many consider his off-schedule throws and ad-libbed adjustments (which require him to run around and the OL to hold their blocks MUCH longer than other teams) to be what separates him. Oh yeah, and there's the fact that GB's OL consistently ranks in the top 10 if not top 5 of pass blocking metrics. Go watch the OL for some other teams: Cincinnati, Houston, LA (either team), or Chicago. There are a lot of teams who can barely find 3 average level starters, GB has done much better than that.

How soon some forget Sitton, Lang, Rivera, Wahle, Clifton, Tauscher, Linsley, Tretter, etc.
For giggles, go check out some of the OL's Holmgren and Wolf rolled out in the early Favre years. It's like a who's who of who's that.

For a couple years we literally rolled out Baktiari, Sitton, (Tretter/Lindsley), Lang and Bulaga. A pro bowl caliber player at every single position.

[bobblehead]

For a couple years we literally rolled out Baktiari, Sitton, (Tretter/Lindsley), Lang and Bulaga. A pro bowl caliber player at every single position.

To quote OBNDY.....Thats not true.

[call_me_ishmael]

To quote OBNDY.....Thats not true.

What's not true about it?

[Bretsky]

I would argue, as I have for many years, that Rodgers never had an O Line that did a good job protecting. He was hurried and/or forced out of the pocket virtually every pass play his whole career. Granted he was a tad bit less mobile this past season, but not much. As for being old in a young man's league, it's NOT a young QB league. Anything Brady could do at 44, certainly Rodgers could do at 40, and probably at 41-44 too.

As for the "self-absorbed shitbag" stuff, I would say that's about 98% the creation of media pukes. There is literally no evidence of any of that toward Packer players, coaches, even fans.


Tex,

Would you have any evidence to support your OL has always sucked theory, such as Pro Football Ratings on OL's with AROD...etc......or is this just an argument w/o any merit and your hunch

Regarding AROD being a shit bad, he's the media whore that brought this on to himself. Just listen to all his attention media whore weekly shows. One can argue he's the goat, or the in season MVP. Or top 10..etc...lots of debate.

Not many debate whether or not he's a shitbag IMO

[texaspackerbacker]

Nope. Just what I've seen for well over a decade.

Regarding Rodgers, undoubtedly the McAfee thing began as a result of all the stupid shit posted about him by media pukes. I really don't give a shit if he's a "shitbag" or not as long as he is the primary thing making my favorite team a winner. I think, though, most of that image or whatever you'd call it comes from knownothing shitheads of the media.

[run pMc]

GB resigning Dallin Leavitt. Rich Bisaccia is the GB GM.

Leavitt's fine on ST but how many ST safeties are they going to sign? None of them can play safety full time. Rudy Ford has his moments, but he got exposed at times and was replaced by Savage (who Ford replaced).
What's John Johnson III doing? He was recently released by CLE and had a couple of good years with LAR in this scheme.

[Arctic Fox]

Tight End or WR in the first round?

[Joemailman]

Tight End or WR in the first round?

This is the Packers we're talking about here. :-D But you never know.

[Arctic Fox]

Love needs some playmakers he can "grow up" with. The Pack will have to break with tradition I think.

[run pMc]

I think they go OT, DL or EDGE in R1, unless they are absolutely in love with JSN. I think they look at a receiver in Day 2, and then take a couple on Day 3. (i.e., 3 total from WR/TE groups)
Maybe Gute proves everyone wrong and trolls Rodgers by drafting a WR in R1 the year he's traded. Doubt it though.

Agree he needs playmakers. Early in the Rodgers era TT loaded up on skill players every year: Greg Jennings, Jordy, James Jones, Jermichael, then Cobb and Adams later... I think they are going to have to do that to build up depth and talent again.
They have a few playmakers (Watson, Aaron Jones) but they need much more than that.

[Fritz]

GB resigning Dallin Leavitt. Rich Bisaccia is the GB GM.

Leavitt's fine on ST but how many ST safeties are they going to sign? None of them can play safety full time. Rudy Ford has his moments, but he got exposed at times and was replaced by Savage (who Ford replaced).
What's John Johnson III doing? He was recently released by CLE and had a couple of good years with LAR in this scheme.

I am so sick of that Bisaccia/Rodgers. I mean, he's the ST coach/quarterback, not the GM, and he just thinks he can tell Guter who to re-sign and probably who to draft!

[QBME]

Love needs some playmakers he can "grow up" with. The Pack will have to break with tradition I think.

Love is surrounded with young playmakers; Jones, Dillon, Watson, Doubs, Toure. Tight End still a question mark.
So, IMHO offensive line is paramount. Then middle defense. Then very importantly late rounders, UDFA’s who realize their future depends on delivering one or two crucial special team plays per game.

[run pMc]

Love is surrounded with young playmakers; Jones, Dillon, Watson, Doubs, Toure. Tight End still a question mark.
So, IMHO offensive line is paramount. Then middle defense. Then very importantly late rounders, UDFA’s who realize their future depends on delivering one or two crucial special team plays per game.

Not sure I'd put Toure or Dillon in the playmaker category. Toure could make a jump but he barely played. Dillon is a FA after this season and is a good backup who seems to need volume.
Doubs is on the fence, could become a playmaker if he can make a Year 2 jump, but if he doesn't and Watson misses 4 games with a hammy or ankle then you're a bit stuck. I think they will absolutely draft at least one receiver (either WR/TE) and perhaps even two before the end of Day 2. Rookie TEs are rarely playmakers...aside from Kyle Pitts (drafted 4th overall and basically used as a big WR) I can't think of one who even approached being a playmaker right out of the gate. Even if they can't find playmakers, finding competent players will help.

I think they will probably be ok at OL this year (APRH) but 2024 it's murky because I think Bahktiari's cap hit will force him out and Njiman likely signs elsewhere. i.e., they likely have two new starting OT in 2024.
They have a lot of OL under contract, this offseason and preseason will tell us a lot about who is worth keeping and who isn't. I'm especially curious about Rhyan, R.Walker, and Caleb Jones. If any of them look good then they have easier time of things. For now, they have Bahktiari, Jenkins, Myers, RunyanJr., Njiman with Tom and Newman as your backups. That's a decent OL.

[Fritz]

Not sure I'd put Toure or Dillon in the playmaker category. Toure could make a jump but he barely played. Dillon is a FA after this season and is a good backup who seems to need volume.
Doubs is on the fence, could become a playmaker if he can make a Year 2 jump, but if he doesn't and Watson misses 4 games with a hammy or ankle then you're a bit stuck. I think they will absolutely draft at least one receiver (either WR/TE) and perhaps even two before the end of Day 2. Rookie TEs are rarely playmakers...aside from Kyle Pitts (drafted 4th overall and basically used as a big WR) I can't think of one who even approached being a playmaker right out of the gate. Even if they can't find playmakers, finding competent players will help.

I think they will probably be ok at OL this year (APRH) but 2024 it's murky because I think Bahktiari's cap hit will force him out and Njiman likely signs elsewhere. i.e., they likely have two new starting OT in 2024.
They have a lot of OL under contract, this offseason and preseason will tell us a lot about who is worth keeping and who isn't. I'm especially curious about Rhyan, R.Walker, and Caleb Jones. If any of them look good then they have easier time of things. For now, they have Bahktiari, Jenkins, Myers, RunyanJr., Njiman with Tom and Newman as your backups. That's a decent OL.

Royce Newman was pretty terrible. I hope that they can find someone better. That dude doesn't even seem like a serviceable backup to me.

I'm wondering if they'll draft an offensive tackle in the mid- to late rounds, one of those developmental guys who can sit and learn and lift weights this year, then start after Bakh/Nijman are gone.

[run pMc]

Royce Newman was pretty terrible. I hope that they can find someone better. That dude doesn't even seem like a serviceable backup to me.

I'm wondering if they'll draft an offensive tackle in the mid- to late rounds, one of those developmental guys who can sit and learn and lift weights this year, then start after Bakh/Nijman are gone.

I expect they will, unless they think someone on the roster already can take over.
Newman was not good at RT, but he was a serviceable backup at RG. He needed to get stronger last offseason and didn't. Also needs to get better recognizing stunts and really didn't.

I don't think he was a bad pick - getting a full year of starts from an R4 rookie in 2021 was pretty good value. Playing RT next to Hanson in early 2022 wrecked his confidence, and not making that Year 2 leap hurt him.
He could still pan out but I suspect he's a career backup type who will always be competing for a spot.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm kind of interested to see what Bo Melton can do. I liked him in the draft last year. I had him in my top 20 WRs, but he went in the 7th round to Seattle as the 26th WR taken. He had a really good preseason with Seattle, but they put him on the practice squad all year--until the Packers signed him. I think he can be used in the jet motion role that Tyler Ervin was in a couple of years ago. Watson was in that role in 2022, but they'll likely want to put him outside more. Melton is 5'11" 189 and ran a 4.34 40 with a 4.10 shuttle, 6.98 3 cone, 38" vert, 121" broad, and 18 bench reps at the combine last year for a 9.23 RAS.

[Joemailman]

I'm kind of interested to see what Bo Melton can do. I liked him in the draft last year. I had him in my top 20 WRs, but he went in the 7th round to Seattle as the 26th WR taken. He had a really good preseason with Seattle, but they put him on the practice squad all year--until the Packers signed him. I think he can be used in the jet motion role that Tyler Ervin was in a couple of years ago. Watson was in that role in 2022, but they'll likely want to put him outside more. Melton is 5'11" 189 and ran a 4.34 40 with a 4.10 shuttle, 6.98 3 cone, 38" vert, 121" broad, and 18 bench reps at the combine last year for a 9.23 RAS.

I wonder if the Packers had him rated higher than Toure. The Seahawks took Melton early in the 7th round right after the Packers took Tariq Carpenter. The Packers then drafted Toure 30 picks later.

[run pMc]

I wonder if the Packers had him rated higher than Toure. The Seahawks took Melton early in the 7th round right after the Packers took Tariq Carpenter. The Packers then drafted Toure 30 picks later.

They brought Toure in for a pre-draft visit, but they obviously liked Melton or they wouldn't have poached him from SEA and kept him around.
I didn't think he played as fast/quick as he tested but I'll have to go back and watch him again. Agree he did some good things in preseason and along with Toure could certainly push for a bigger role.

At this point I'm actually coming around to the idea of waiting until after the draft to see what WRs get cut, and if Cobb would want to come back on the vet minimum to be the old sage in the WR room. Probably wouldn't play much but just to help all these young players.
I think Cobb and Lewis are waiting for the Rodgers trade to happen before anything happens with them. Lewis wouldn't be a bad add also, especially if they draft a couple of TEs although I wonder if they think DeGuara can be the vet leader in that group.
With the turnover at some of the big offensive positions, there's definitely some value in having veteran leadership and keeping the locker room level.

[Fritz]

It would be kinda funny if the Packers ended up re-signing Cobb and Lewis, though I don't think they will.

[Joemailman]

It would be kinda funny if the Packers ended up re-signing Cobb and Lewis, though I don't think they will.

It wouldn't surprise me at all. It's practically a given the Packers will bring in a veteran WR and frankly, Cobb is as good as anyone that is left. And he knows the offense. Lewis is fits in as well in that the Packers will likely want to run the ball a lot to take pressure off Love. Probably nothing happens before the draft though.

[Fritz]

Or ten minutes after he finalizes the deal with the Jets, just to stick a knife into Rodgers just a little.

[Joemailman]

Or ten minutes after he finalizes the deal with the Jets, just to stick a knife into Rodgers just a little.

Well, I'm starting to wonder if the trade happens Thursday night/Friday morning between the 1st and 2nd rounds of the draft.

[Fritz]

Well, I'm starting to wonder if the trade happens Thursday night/Friday morning between the 1st and 2nd rounds of the draft.

That would be a distinct possibility, as it would allow both teams to re-shuffle their boards and make determinations about what they have available in that all-important second round. Imagine the stare-down that would go on, though, if one side balks? Wow. Fun.

[Joemailman]

That would be a distinct possibility, as it would allow both teams to re-shuffle their boards and make determinations about what they have available in that all-important second round. Imagine the stare-down that would go on, though, if one side balks? Wow. Fun.

The network coverage on draft night will be insane if it happens.

[run pMc]

I think it will happen before Round 1, most likely the day of, or the day before.
I think both teams will want the Rodgers situation settled before going into the draft so they can move forward with a plan, and GB wants to get draft capital THIS year for trading Rodgers.

One random thought was if they can't make a deal, NYJ packages their #13 pick and 2 R2 picks to move up and try to draft Levis, but that leaves them with Levis, Wilson and Boyle at QB. I don't think that's a good situation for Saleh and Douglas.
Also, Douglas has basically said Rodgers will be a Jet, so I think a deal will happen on the eve of the draft.

[Fritz]

I think it will happen before Round 1, most likely the day of, or the day before.
I think both teams will want the Rodgers situation settled before going into the draft so they can move forward with a plan, and GB wants to get draft capital THIS year for trading Rodgers.

One random thought was if they can't make a deal, NYJ packages their #13 pick and 2 R2 picks to move up and try to draft Levis, but that leaves them with Levis, Wilson and Boyle at QB. I don't think that's a good situation for Saleh and Douglas.
Also, Douglas has basically said Rodgers will be a Jet, so I think a deal will happen on the eve of the draft.

The plus side to waiting until the end of the first round is that the Packers would know what the board looked like - see if they have players slotted into that second tier, or if there are still a couple of what they think are first-tier players sitting out there. That would solidify the value - or lack thereof - of those Jets' second round picks. The down side of course is if there is a stare-down and nobody blinks, the second round ends and you've got nothing but your own pick there, so you are deferring compensation to the third round or to next year, or whenever. That's a little spooky. Unless you don't mind waiting for your compensation until the third round or next year.

Please, Packers, don't take any third round picks. You know you suck at the third round. If it gets to the third round, and no trade has been consummated, just go for an extra second next year.

[run pMc]

Gute has said the price goes up after the draft. It will get done before then. I think NYJ is fine giving them a R2 this year. Thanks to Rodgers saying he was 90% retiring, the NYJ are having heartburn about giving up future picks for a player who likely won't be playing anymore.

If the Jets can get a two year commitment from Rodgers -- more power to them if they can -- then this deal is already done. Rodgers is basically ghosts everyone in the offseason to get psychedelic colonics and healing crystals, he's too busy to commit to two years of football.
Given he gets another bonus in 2024 I wouldn't put it out of the realm of possibility that he plays, but you never know.

I think GB gets a R2 this year plus future picks with a bunch of conditional mumbo jumbo to protect both teams. Gute does not want to give a pick back, and I don't blame him.

[Sparkey]

Gute has said the price goes up after the draft. It will get done before then. I think NYJ is fine giving them a R2 this year. Thanks to Rodgers saying he was 90% retiring, the NYJ are having heartburn about giving up future picks for a player who likely won't be playing anymore.

If the Jets can get a two year commitment from Rodgers -- more power to them if they can -- then this deal is already done. Rodgers is basically ghosts everyone in the offseason to get psychedelic colonics and healing crystals, he's too busy to commit to two years of football.
Given he gets another bonus in 2024 I wouldn't put it out of the realm of possibility that he plays, but you never know.

I think GB gets a R2 this year plus future picks with a bunch of conditional mumbo jumbo to protect both teams. Gute does not want to give a pick back, and I don't blame him.

Instead of an escalating pick next year, just ask for both of their 2nds this year. A JET 1st next year means they played really well, maybe AFC Champion well. That means their 1st will be around high 28 or better.

[run pMc]

So- off season Banjo.

GB needs a backup QB, 3-4 players at WR/TE, plus answers to questions at starting safety (both spots?), edge rusher, and 2024 offensive tackle. Oh, they also probably need a kicker too.
Do they address what they can in the draft and just dangle in the wind on the rest? They don't have cap space to bring much FA talent in.

I don't think Crosby is back unless he still wants to play and he's willing to take a pay cut. He can retire as the all time scorer in Packers history.

[ThunderDan]

The plus side to waiting until the end of the first round is that the Packers would know what the board looked like - see if they have players slotted into that second tier, or if there are still a couple of what they think are first-tier players sitting out there. That would solidify the value - or lack thereof - of those Jets' second round picks. The down side of course is if there is a stare-down and nobody blinks, the second round ends and you've got nothing but your own pick there, so you are deferring compensation to the third round or to next year, or whenever. That's a little spooky. Unless you don't mind waiting for your compensation until the third round or next year.

Please, Packers, don't take any third round picks. You know you suck at the third round. If it gets to the third round, and no trade has been consummated, just go for an extra second next year.

You can breathe easy. The Jets don’t have a 3rd round pick to trade.

[RashanGary]

I think the trade will either happen when the Jets pick is up at 13 or on day 2 when the jets are up with the 42nd pick. I think they wanna see who’s there before they pull the trigger. If a guy they really want is there, they’ll sweeten the pot with next years picks. Otherwise they’ll either trade 13 or 42 or 42 and 43. Possibly with some conditionals going or coming back.

[run pMc]

I don't think the 13th pick is in play at all, unless it's a pick swap. It's possible a trade doesn't happen before Day 2 of the draft, but I doubt it.
Too much pressure on the GMs not to do a deal. Woody Johnson and the Jets fans will be howling for a deal to be done by then, and I'm sure Murphy and many GB fans will as well.
I guess we'll see. At this point the whole Rodgers-watch thing bores me. I'm not an insider and until something happens it's just speculating at this stage.


Different topic: Packers have Savage, Ford, Leavitt, Carpenter, Wiggins, and Gaines listed as safeties on the roster. I'm guessing Savage and Ford are the starters. With a weak safety class, how do fans feel about that? I think it's an issue and they will draft someone late day2/early day 3. (Current favorite is Jordan Battle, I think he's solid if unspectacular and could play the role vacated by Adrian Amos.)

Anyone know anything about Eric Stokes' injury status?
Their secondary is a mix of mismatched parts. Feels like it's a leftover from the Pettine era and doesn't fit what Barry wants.

[Fritz]

I don't think the 13th pick is in play at all, unless it's a pick swap. It's possible a trade doesn't happen before Day 2 of the draft, but I doubt it.
Too much pressure on the GMs not to do a deal. Woody Johnson and the Jets fans will be howling for a deal to be done by then, and I'm sure Murphy and many GB fans will as well.
I guess we'll see. At this point the whole Rodgers-watch thing bores me. I'm not an insider and until something happens it's just speculating at this stage.


Different topic: Packers have Savage, Ford, Leavitt, Carpenter, Wiggins, and Gaines listed as safeties on the roster. I'm guessing Savage and Ford are the starters. With a weak safety class, how do fans feel about that? I think it's an issue and they will draft someone late day2/early day 3. (Current favorite is Jordan Battle, I think he's solid if unspectacular and could play the role vacated by Adrian Amos.)

Anyone know anything about Eric Stokes' injury status?
Their secondary is a mix of mismatched parts. Feels like it's a leftover from the Pettine era and doesn't fit what Barry wants.

Agree with this assessment of the safety room and the draft class. I hope Guter doesn't reach and use that first rounder on a safety who doesn't merit a first-round pick, just so he can meet a need. From what Harv says, the top-rated guy is more of a slot guy anyway - just what the Packers don't need any more of. So my hope is they don't focus too heavily on the draft, maybe try to find a high upside/developmental guy somewhere NOT the first or maybe even second round that fits what Barry does (if Barry's going to be around).

As for Stokes, the idea is that the smoke signals so far suggest Stokesy won't be ready at the start of the season.

[run pMc]

I don't think there's a safety worth taking that fits GB before Round 3 -- none of the actual safeties who would play deep look stellar, nor did they athletically test as such.
Guys like Brian Branch, Antonio Johnson and Jammie Robinson all play up in the box or in the slot and aren't good fits in my opinion, although I think Branch is the best of that trio and might get taken in R1 by a team as a slot corner type. I think Chris Smith and Jordan Battle are the best of the GB scheme safeties. Brandon Joseph, and the Brown kid from PSU. Those guys tested poorly though, and Gute like his high end athletes.

I don't think I ever really heard what Stokes' injury was aside from a knee/ankle issue, which could be anything and that makes it a little ominous. He wasn't exactly Mr. Agility before. Maybe I still have Derek Sherrod PTSD. As it is, Jaire, Rasul, and Stokes are all outside corners and they can really only play two there, so if he's out for a while it's not the biggest loss, but it's a concern long-term. Maybe it doesn't matter anyway with Barry having his corners lining up 8 yards off the LOS.

[Fritz]

"Derrick Sherrod PTSD" - that is funny.

Felt bad for that guy. Not his fault, what happened to him. He had agility and potential, maybe a little dancing-bear-ish, but that's what some said about Chad Clifton.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I don't think there's a safety worth taking that fits GB before Round 3 -- none of the actual safeties who would play deep look stellar, nor did they athletically test as such.
Guys like Brian Branch, Antonio Johnson and Jammie Robinson all play up in the box or in the slot and aren't good fits in my opinion, although I think Branch is the best of that trio and might get taken in R1 by a team as a slot corner type. I think Chris Smith and Jordan Battle are the best of the GB scheme safeties. Brandon Joseph, and the Brown kid from PSU. Those guys tested poorly though, and Gute like his high end athletes.

I don't think I ever really heard what Stokes' injury was aside from a knee/ankle issue, which could be anything and that makes it a little ominous. He wasn't exactly Mr. Agility before. Maybe I still have Derek Sherrod PTSD. As it is, Jaire, Rasul, and Stokes are all outside corners and they can really only play two there, so if he's out for a while it's not the biggest loss, but it's a concern long-term. Maybe it doesn't matter anyway with Barry having his corners lining up 8 yards off the LOS.

I haven't taken a hard look at safeties yet, but it seems like the two Illinois safeties on day 2, Daniel Scott late day 2, Brandon Hill, Chamarri Conner, and Jason Taylor on day 3 are what the Packers would be looking for in this draft class. I've seen a bit of Jordan Howden of Minnesota while scouting WRs, and he seems intriguing.

[run pMc]

I haven't taken a hard look at safeties yet, but it seems like the two Illinois safeties on day 2, Daniel Scott late day 2, Brandon Hill, Chamarri Conner, and Jason Taylor on day 3 are what the Packers would be looking for in this draft class. I've seen a bit of Jordan Howden of Minnesota while scouting WRs, and he seems intriguing.

It's not the best class. Last year's was much better. The ones who are getting the highest rating are more slot or in-the-box types, and not the best fits for what GB needs. GB also has a few of them already (Savage, Carpenter, etc.)
I haven't looked at Howden yet but he's a 5th year guy with a lot of snaps on D and ST and IIRC he was a defensive captain so he could easily be a Bisaccia guy. He's not highly rated as a defensive player, but is apparently a good athlete so I could see them spending a R7 pick or making him a priority UDFA.

[Fritz]

Whole new landscape now that Rodgers is halfway out the door.

[run pMc]

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2023/4/13/23680911/aaron-rodgers-trade-update-new-york-jets-altered-trade-offer-green-bay-packers-pat-mcafee-show

Rodgers actions having consequences for him (and others)? IMAGINE THAT.

[Bretsky]

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2023/4/13/23680911/aaron-rodgers-trade-update-new-york-jets-altered-trade-offer-green-bay-packers-pat-mcafee-show

Rodgers actions having consequences for him (and others)? IMAGINE THAT.



tHAT f'CKING GD MEDIA WHORE KAREN RODGERS keep screwing us.

Screw the Jets; let them get Tannehilll and suck it up again.

Trade him to SF for an unconditional 1st rounder in 2024 and a couple thirds,and covert those 3rds into a 2nd rounder cause Gutebag has drafted nothing but shit on a shingle in R3

[Fritz]

I wonder if Mercedes Lewis will be re-signed if Green Bay drafts a tight end with the #15 pick - a mentor. But I guess that depends upon whether GB drafts a second tight end, as well.

[run pMc]

I wonder if Mercedes Lewis will be re-signed if Green Bay drafts a tight end with the #15 pick - a mentor. But I guess that depends upon whether GB drafts a second tight end, as well.

Do NOT want a TE at #15. If you're taking a TE in R1, for heaven's sake trade down a few times for extra picks. I'd take an EDGE or OT before a TE, and IMO you can actually find fine TEs in this year's draft on Day 2.
I could see them bringing Lewis back, but I have a feeling he's going where Rodgers goes. I'd rather have Lewis back than Cobb.

[Bretsky]

Do NOT want a TE at #15. If you're taking a TE in R1, for heaven's sake trade down a few times for extra picks. I'd take an EDGE or OT before a TE, and IMO you can actually find fine TEs in this year's draft on Day 2.
I could see them bringing Lewis back, but I have a feeling he's going where Rodgers goes. I'd rather have Lewis back than Cobb.


I would rather have a WR in Round one than a TE

I agree if going TE trade back..........although

I kinda think the top 4 TE's may go before our normal second round pick.

I'd like to see one of the top 4 in GB and then another in round 5-7 as well

[run pMc]

I would rather have a WR in Round one than a TE

I agree if going TE trade back..........although

I kinda think the top 4 TE's may go before our normal second round pick.

I'd like to see one of the top 4 in GB and then another in round 5-7 as well

Agree. I'll be interested to see how teams value the TEs based on where they are drafted
Positional value for TEs is kind of strange.
I'd like to see Gute move around the board if they're taking one early. I think there are some good ones that will last to Round 3 and it's possible to find them on Day 3.

[Fritz]

Who know? Maybe he'll be able to find someone to trade back only a few spaces - if the TE position hasn't had a run, he could conceivably get one of the top ones around 18- 22. Maybe pick up an extra fourth, draft a Vince Biegel? Hell, I don't know. I think drafting an EDGE or a defensive tackle or end, or an offensive tackle, would excite me most.

[run pMc]

I think there will be a run on OT & CB before TE. Kincaid, Mayer, and maybe Washington the likely suspects as you get into the mid-20's of Round 1 makes some sense to me. I honestly am not sure what the positional value of a TE is. A really good one is worth a lot, but there are so few of them (and you can occasionally find them later). Also, TEs don't often get more than 700 yards (last year SEVEN did). You might be able to get that out of JSN his first year.

Still, having one or two quality TEs would be fun in the MLF offense, and there are a few good inline Y-type TEs that Gute should look at.

[Fritz]

From the Packers' perspective, it'd be helpful if some QB whom nobody suspected got picked in the top 14, and if there were also a run on CB's a few picks before Green Bay picks - maybe they could trade back a bit?

But the draft never seems to go the way my wish-list goes. So we'll see.

I'm really curious is Gutes goes fairly early TE and one mid-round or later, or if he just does one high-pick TE and then re-signs Lewis.

Maybe, with the depth of the TE's, this is the year they pick one in the third round - and actually hit on a third-round pick.

[run pMc]

From the Packers' perspective, it'd be helpful if some QB whom nobody suspected got picked in the top 14, and if there were also a run on CB's a few picks before Green Bay picks - maybe they could trade back a bit?
If both Levis and Richardson go early, it could help a player fall to GB. OTOH, if Levis is there at 15, some team might want to trade up for him.

I think Stroud, Young, Will Anderson, Tyree Wilson, Paris Johnson, Skoronski, Christian Gonzalez, Witherspoon, Jalen Carter are gone by 15. There are a few others who are 50/50 shots such as Levis, Broderick Jones, and JSN who could be gone. Maybe Joey Porter Jr., maybe some late riser like Darnell Wright or Van Ness.

I think there could be a mini-run on WR at end of R1 along with TE's : Quentin Johnson, Zay Flowers, Jordan Addison. There should be a decent player available at 15 for GB, and likewise if they move down to 20 and pick up an extra R3.

It's prime lying season, so who knows what any team really thinks.

[run pMc]

Yosh Njiman signs his tender. They have a starting RT for a year.

[Fritz]

With Zach Tom waiting in the wings. Or is he going to be pushing Myers for the starting center job?

[run pMc]

I think he could play C or T. I think he could replace Bakhtiari at LT eventually.
I'm not really sure what the succession plan there is: Tom, Jenkins, developmental player (Rasheed Walker?) or a draft pick. At least they have options.

Personally, I wouldn't be shocked if they traded Bahktiari at the trade deadline if they are out of the playoff hunt by then and they have someone waiting in the wings. Bahktiari has that big cap hit next year so I think he's more likely dealt vs. trading Njiman to a team that signs him to a mid-season extension.
Jenkins can play LT, but I think he's best as a C/G. Tom is interesting as competition at C for Myers. Myers better bring it this year.