Packers 2022 Discussion Thread

[adambr2]

[OldHeidelberg]

2 hours ago, homer said:

I don't think they thought Adams was actually going to leave.

I think from comments Rodgers made that Adams had been upset with the Packer org about not giving him an extension earlier and everyone knew he was not coming back for a while. I guess maybe they believed they could change his mind. Interesting they chose to extend Bakh at the end of 20 when they could have maybe gotten Adams extended on a cheaper deal at the time. 20/20 hindsight of course but that Bakh contract has been a disaster.

[UpandIn]

On 11/7/2022 at 7:56 AM, adambr2 said:

To just spend a 1st round pick on a guy to hold a clipboard? That's nuts. It's a waste. It makes no sense. They couldn't pick a plan and stick with it, and as a result they're not contenders, and they're also not set up well for the future. Not a good position to be in. 

This is...literally what they did with Aaron Rodgers. 

And Rodgers 4th year, they tried to talk Favre into coming back. 

I'll also say, yes, every team needs multiple RBs and TE was a need and Deguara was a guy compared to Kittle coming out...and he tore his ACL right way.

So these arguments are kinda at odds. Also, MLF was not a "run the ball 60% of the time," type of QB. Even the 49ers and their running game wanted Rodgers. You need an elite QB in the modern NFL...

Even Shanahan's best teams were those outside zone teams in ATL and then SF, they threw the ball and had an MVP in Matt Ryan. 

On 11/7/2022 at 8:50 AM, OldSchoolSnapper said:

This is all classic 20/20. I didn't hear any significant number of people bemoaning AJ Dillon until this crappy season. Most people liked the versatility at the position until this month. 

The truth is the Packers built two championship quality teams (quickly, on the heels of looking very bad in 2018) and didn't finish the job and it really had very little or nothing to do with the GM everyone suddenly wants to fire. The guys on the field didn't get it done the last two seasons. That was the window with their aging QB. There were holes on the roster, there always are on any team, and the GM is always lightning rod there. But they were every bit of "good enough" to get another one and blew it. In particular, last year when the field was soft and they showed all year they were better than the contenders. When you load up like they did that rocket has to come back to Earth and it is this year.

Last year might go down as worse than 2014 for me personally. I thought they had the best team. Them's the breaks I guess.

There was complaining about AJ Dillon. Then he played...and played well and there were people, just like with the Gary pick who didn't remember complaining or joked about how they didn't like the pick then, but like it now. And now that he's having a bad season again....

The truth IS the Packers built two Championship caliber teams. That Bakh injured may have cost them two chances. Jenkins injury has cost them and he hasn't rebounded(people talk about taking a RB at the end of the 2nd round, but a OG at the start of the 2nd is at least as questionable...unless it works). 

I know everyone's writing off the Rodgers era, but...hell, we'll be picking high. Maybe we get a Tristan Wirfs type player in the 1st and the raw 1st round picks develop by next year. Rodgers still most likely has 2 years left. This years a wrap with Gary and the injuries, but look at the Giants, Jets and teams like that. We can absolutely get back there the next couple years. 

Or Rodgers retires and we re-set for the future. We'll see. I'm not going to re-write history and ignore what this front office/HC did the last several years because everything has gone wrong this past off-season. 

[adambr2]

1 hour ago, UpandIn said:

This is...literally what they did with Aaron Rodgers. 

And Rodgers 4th year, they tried to talk Favre into coming back. 

 

You're taking my remarks out of context and I think you know this. 

It's not nuts to draft a QB in the 1st round for him to hold a clipboard ....at first. 

It's nuts if you have no real plan for said QB to take over the reigns at some point,  and just be a backup instead. The Packers CLEARLY planned for AR to eventually succeed Favre. They don't appear to have any such clear plan now. 

This was 14+ years ago but I have no recollection of the Packers *trying to talk Favre into coming back* in Rodgers 4th year. I recall them encouraging him to make up his mind quickly, Favre retiring, and then the Packers saying "no, we're good" when he tried to "unretire."

And Deguara was not considered to be a "George Kittle" type prospect in the eyes of the vast majority of draft experts. He was a 2 star recruit with a slow 40 time and limited athleticism. He was widely considered to be overdrafted as a 3rd round pick. 

[UpandIn]

5 hours ago, adambr2 said:

You're taking my remarks out of context and I think you know this. 

It's not nuts to draft a QB in the 1st round for him to hold a clipboard ....at first. 

It's nuts if you have no real plan for said QB to take over the reigns at some point,  and just be a backup instead. The Packers CLEARLY planned for AR to eventually succeed Favre. They don't appear to have any such clear plan now. 

I don't think I'm doing that literally AT ALL. 

Did they not draft Aaron Rodgers, have him "hold a clipboard" for 3 years and then try and talk Favre into coming back multiple times before he made his announcement, they used two draft picks on a QB and then decided to move on?

What was the plan THEN other than they drafted a QB they thought was the best player available?

What's been twisted? If you don't like the ideology NOW, then you don't like the ideology from then. The only difference as of now, the Rodgers picked proved to be a good move and the Love pick is still in it's 3rd year and has not. 

Tell me what part of what you said am I twisting?

5 hours ago, adambr2 said:

This was 14+ years ago but I have no recollection of the Packers *trying to talk Favre into coming back* in Rodgers 4th year. I recall them encouraging him to make up his mind quickly, Favre retiring, and then the Packers saying "no, we're good" when he tried to "unretire."

They did. They made multiple trips down. McCarthy went down, Murphy went down there, they told him to take more time and said they wanted him back.

The "no, we're good," again, AFTER they spent a whole summer developing Aaron Rodgers, using a 2nd round pick on Brian Brohm and a 7th round pick on Matt Flynn. 

 

5 hours ago, adambr2 said:

You're taking my remarks out of context and I think you know this. 

It's not nuts to draft a QB in the 1st round for him to hold a clipboard ....at first. 

And I still genuinely have no clue how I'm taking your remarks out of context and apparently know this. This situation is SOOO similar to the Rodgers situation, I'm not sure there's a more comparable situation in NFL history. 

Love STILL hasn't "held a clipboard," as long as Rodgers has, and again, they absolutely wanted Favre back again immediately following the 2008 season. 

So I'd like some clarification on what's been twisted or how these situations are different?

 

As for the plans to have that backup QB take over at some point, do ya think maybe even if they did have those plans, the back to back MVPs and three straight 13 win seasons may have changed that?

[adambr2]

Well, there's several pretty substantial differences in context between the two situations. 

1 - Jordan Love is not the prospect that Aaron Rodgers was. Not close. Rodgers was widely considered the 1A or 1B of the 2005 draft. When Jordan Love fell out of the top 10, there was not discussion of the situation. When he fell out of the top 20, there were not cameras panning to his face wondering how he had fallen so far. Thompson was in a damned if he did, damned if he didn't situation when Rodgers fell into his lap. In no way is that comparable to Gute trading up 4 spots to grab Jordan Love.

2 - Favre routinely held the team hostage with retirement speculation in the offseason, so it was important that the team was prepared to move on after his departure as he was essentially going year to year. There was no such realistic speculation that Aaron Rodgers was going to retire following the 2019 NFL season. 

3 - The collective bargaining agreement in place when Aaron Rodgers was drafted was completely different than the one that exists today. You do not see teams draft a QB in the first round with the intent of having them sit on the bench for 3 years and hold a clipboard, it does not happen. Maybe one year, and even then the most marginal of 1st round QB prospects (Kenny Pickett) often start seeing reps in their first season. You don't wait on your franchise quarterback for the majority of his rookie contract, it makes no sense to. Part of the point of having a QB on a rookie deal is the tremendous advantage that the team has to dedicate financial resources to other positions and get the most expensive position at a huge discount. You lose that advantage by paying big bucks for a starter AND having a 1st round QB sit on the bench for years. It's just bad business. On top of that you have to make a enormous 5th year option decision on Jordan Love without having any real idea what he is capable of as a starter. It's a very poor allocation of resources if the actual plan was to have him sit for years like Aaron did. 

I'm fully confident that if the organization had any real confidence in the abilities of Jordan Love after seeing him for 2 seasons, knowing that Davante Adams out, knowing they were already financially strapped -- they would have been happy to say, "ok, let's take the picks from Denver, let's move on."

 

 

 

 

 

[UpandIn]

2 hours ago, adambr2 said:

1 - Jordan Love is not the prospect that Aaron Rodgers was. Not close. Rodgers was widely considered the 1A or 1B of the 2005 draft. When Jordan Love fell out of the top 10, there was not discussion of the situation. When he fell out of the top 20, there were not cameras panning to his face wondering how he had fallen so far. Thompson was in a damned if he did, damned if he didn't situation when Rodgers fell into his lap. In no way is that comparable to Gute trading up 4 spots to grab Jordan Love.

That was a MUCH weaker draft class with Alex Smith and then Aaron Rodgers. 

Saying he is "NOT the prospect," is revisionist history. "Lacked arm strength, athletic ability, poor mechanics, system QB, Tedford QB." The failures of Joey Harrington, Akili Smith, Kyle Boller 

Love was in a draft class with Joe Burrow, the consensus #1 pick, Tua...remember the "tank for Tua," campaign. And then Justin Herbert and the Chargers didn't settle on Herbert over Love until shortly before the draft. 

Also, in the Rodgers draft, per Rodgers, if the Packers hadn't taken him, he wouldn't have been the 2nd QB drafted as Jason Campbell was preferred by Washington and Seattle. 

This "Love is not the prospect Aaron Rodgers was. Not close," is both revisionist history and it also undermines the foundation of your original argument. 

For the purpose of your ORIGINAL point, that they drafted positions they didn't need.]

Your memory also doesn't seem very strong on the reaction of the pick at the time and his performances in his first two years(pretty much up until he got into the Dallas game when Packers fans started to think they might have something. The fact that he ended up on IR 2 of his first 3 years with injuries despite hardly ANY playing time...didn't engender much confidence either. But yes, it's MUCH easier to say "he wasn't as good," when one player hasn't played and the other went on to have a historic NFL career. 

2 hours ago, adambr2 said:

2 - Favre routinely held the team hostage with retirement speculation in the offseason, so it was important that the team was prepared to move on after his departure as he was essentially going year to year. There was no such realistic speculation that Aaron Rodgers was going to retire following the 2019 NFL season. 

Another misnomar. Favre had barely mentioned retirement by the time they drafted Rodgers. In fact, I don't know if he brought it up unprompted at all. 

Donald Driver said in 2006 after the loss to Minnesota in the Randy Moss moon game that he thought Favre was done. HE came out and said that, not Favre and that was after Rodgers. The retirement talk has also undergone revisionist history. Once Love got there, Favre with his own personal locker room started to hem and haw and then it became STRONGLY tied to him due to the 2008 retirement/comebck, then the Jets retirement, then the Vikings 2 seasons. 

He was NOT "holding the Packers hostage" before they drafted Aaron Rodgers. He ALSO said(similar to Rodgers) in 2004 that he wanted to play until at least 40. 

So there was no real such speculation that Favre was going to retire after 2004(I guess we're going a year before the player was drafted unless you mean 2020). 

2 hours ago, adambr2 said:

3 - The collective bargaining agreement in place when Aaron Rodgers was drafted was completely different than the one that exists today. You do not see teams draft a QB in the first round with the intent of having them sit on the bench for 3 years and hold a clipboard, it does not happen

Huh? How did the collective bargaining agreement change the scenario? It actually made MORE sense with the 5th year option to move up and draft a QB early. The CBA at the time made it make LESS sense to draft a QB and sit them as there was no rookie wage scale...but that was ultimately irrelevant as the picks in the 20s didn't get the massive Sam Bradford type deals. 

I'm genuinely curious how the CBA plays into this at all in your argument in this scenario. Rodgers made more relative to the cap than Love has on his rookie deal, so that...just doesn't make any sense. 

2 hours ago, adambr2 said:

I'm fully confident that if the organization had any real confidence in the abilities of Jordan Love after seeing him for 2 seasons, knowing that Davante Adams out, knowing they were already financially strapped -- they would have been happy to say, "ok, let's take the picks from Denver, let's move on."

So...after watching Rodgers win an MVP in back to back year, you're "fully confident" that if the Packers had any confidence, the team that had lost in the playoffs two previous years to the Super Bowl Champ and had been in the NFCCG 2 of the last 3 years, THEY would have gone with their young QB? 

I...don't believe you really believe that.

If Rodgers was in SF and the Packers were in the position they are today, but with THAT team, with Deebo, Kittle, McCaffery, Trent Williams, that defense, and he was playing at an MVP level, the decision to draft Love would be a complete afterthought OTHER than to blame that choice on the decision to trade Favre. 

You don't trade a back to back MVP because you have "any confidence" in a 23 year old QB at that point. 

In hindsight, sure, that probably would have been better, but it is...absurd to throw this out there like it was obvious. This fan base would have revolted if they'd willingly(meaning he wasn't forcing it) traded Aaron Rodgers after last season. 

 

2 hours ago, adambr2 said:

2 - Favre routinely held the team hostage with retirement speculation in the offseason, so it was important that the team was prepared to move on after his departure as he was essentially going year to year. There was no such realistic speculation that Aaron Rodgers was going to retire following the 2019 NFL season. 

One more point. The Packers had little intention of drafting Rodgers. Just like with Love, they believed he'd be gone well before their pick(and particularly in that QB draft class). 

So this idea that the Rodgers pick was calculated because of Favre's talk about retirement...which again, hadn't actually started yet aside from Driver throwing it out there as his own personal opinion, it holds no weight. 

 

 

I REALLY don't think you remember just how awful Rodgers looked when he played his first 2 1/2 years(whenever the Dallas game was in year 3). I do kinda think it's funny how legends grow. This idea that everyone knew how great Rodgers was his first two years, how he was this can't miss prospect because the 49ers didn't immediately announce who they were going to draft(though the overwhelming consensus was always Alex Smith). 

I'd suggest going back and looking at actual scouting reports from Aaron Rodgers coming out(and no, not just one that's positive and then showing me, I'm suggesting you do it to spark your own memory). Or the reports on Rodgers after the first couple pre-seasons. 

 

 

Now...I'll let you get the last word in. I don't really care at this point and what's happened has happened, so going back and relitigating it seems pointless. Hypotheticals are one thing, harping on a moves made a few years ago...seems pointless. 

[CheezWizHed]

@UpandIn, no one can get the last word because you just used them all! ?

On a different note, I meant to highlight McDuffie's play last week.  He didn't have a ton of time, but looked very good out there.  This article sums it up well (and tickled my memory):  https://packerswire.usatoday.com/2022/11/08/packers-lb-isaiah-mcduffie-shines-vs-run-during-first-nfl-start/

But it also highlighted something of a concern I've had for a while with Walker.  He is terrible at getting off blocks.  I've noticed it for a while that once tied up, he is essentially "done", which seems like a big part of our run defense issues. But seeing the contrast between he and McDuffie in that article really shows the difference.  Its like Walker doesn't see the blocker (300+lb guard) or just makes not attempt to avoid it and simply goes quietly into the block without a fight.  The last play it looks like Walker is holding the edge, so that is understandable.  But the others has him walled off in the middle of the field while McDuffie is dodging right around his blocker to make the play.

Hope the rook gets that corrected quickly!

[adambr2]

5 hours ago, UpandIn said:

 

Another misnomar. Favre had barely mentioned retirement by the time they drafted Rodgers. In fact, I don't know if he brought it up unprompted at all. 

Donald Driver said in 2006 after the loss to Minnesota in the Randy Moss moon game that he thought Favre was done. HE came out and said that, not Favre and that was after Rodgers. The retirement talk has also undergone revisionist history. Once Love got there, Favre with his own personal locker room started to hem and haw and then it became STRONGLY tied to him due to the 2008 retirement/comebck, then the Jets retirement, then the Vikings 2 seasons. 

He was NOT "holding the Packers hostage" before they drafted Aaron Rodgers. He ALSO said(similar to Rodgers) in 2004 that he wanted to play until at least 40. 

So there was no real such speculation that Favre was going to retire after 2004(I guess we're going a year before the player was drafted unless you mean 2020). 

Favre's talk about retirement...which again, hadn't actually started yet aside from Driver throwing it out there as his own personal opinion, it holds no weight. 

 

 

 

https://www.packers.com/news/ap-story-brett-favre-to-return-to-packers-in-2005-2458548

It did not take much research to contradict this entire statement.

I don't have time to address the rest right now, so I'll just leave it at that other than to say if you're going to accuse someone of revisionist history you certainly ought to ensure first that you're not guilty of it yourself.

I do remember Rodgers first couple seasons, by the way. I remember the MNF game against Baltimore. Yes, it was quite ugly. 

[brewcrewdue80]

Yep...

Nope. Not going to waste my time

[LouisEly]

They're going to need a bunch of rookies to make the roster next year.  They have needs everywhere.  Technically Amos isn't signed beyond this year - they just added a couple of void years on to his contract.  If they can't come to an agreement on an extension they'll need to spend a high-ish pick spent there.  Might need to spend one there anyway; they exercised Savage's 5th year but he isn't signed beyond next year and his best fit moving forward might be nickel as he's had struggles at safety.  They certainly need backups so perhaps a late round pick too.

By sheer number of bodies w/Gary injured and the cap situation likely preventing a significant FA signing, they'll need at least one if not two picks at OLB, with one being high-ish.

Cobb, Lazard, and Watkins are FA's so they'll need a couple of bodies at WR.  Mercedes and Tonyan are FA's and Davis a RFA, so they'll need a couple of bodies there. 

Reed and Lowry are free agents with void years.  They'll need to spend at least one pick there.

Who knows with OL.  Tom, Walker, and Jones look like they could play the part but will need to make that big year two jump.  Those three and Rhyan will need to play roles next year.

Depth next year is going to be a lot of rookies/year-2 guys.

[UpandIn]

On 11/9/2022 at 1:09 PM, adambr2 said:

https://www.packers.com/news/ap-story-brett-favre-to-return-to-packers-in-2005-2458548

It did not take much research to contradict this entire statement.

I don't have time to address the rest right now, so I'll just leave it at that other than to say if you're going to accuse someone of revisionist history you certainly ought to ensure first that you're not guilty of it yourself.

I do remember Rodgers first couple seasons, by the way. I remember the MNF game against Baltimore. Yes, it was quite ugly. 

Does it?

 

Quote

 

Wide receiver Donald Driver created a controversy when he said at the Super Bowl he talks to Favre often and he felt Favre wasn't coming back. Speculation got so crazy that running back Ahman Green even got some radio play by saying "it could go either way."

Because Favre hasn't spoken publicly about his plans

 

 

Sounds pretty much exactly like what I said;

Quote

Favre had barely mentioned retirement by the time they drafted Rodgers. In fact, I don't know if he brought it up unprompted at all. 

 

[adambr2]

I never said Driver didn't say this. I understand he did. I just think to say "Favre had barely mentioned retirement by the time they drafted Rodgers" is pretty indisputably untrue. 

"The three-time MVP said after the Packers' playoff loss to Minnesota in January he wanted to reflect before committing to playing a 15th NFL season following a year of personal tumult."

 

You implied that the annual Favre retirement saga is more just a Mandela effect type misconception that shouldn't have had any influence on a decision to draft Rodgers and I just believe that that clearly isn't true. 

[UpandIn]

2 hours ago, LouisEly said:

They're going to need a bunch of rookies to make the roster next year.  They have needs everywhere.  Technically Amos isn't signed beyond this year - they just added a couple of void years on to his contract.  If they can't come to an agreement on an extension they'll need to spend a high-ish pick spent there.  Might need to spend one there anyway; they exercised Savage's 5th year but he isn't signed beyond next year and his best fit moving forward might be nickel as he's had struggles at safety.  They certainly need backups so perhaps a late round pick too.

By sheer number of bodies w/Gary injured and the cap situation likely preventing a significant FA signing, they'll need at least one if not two picks at OLB, with one being high-ish.

Cobb, Lazard, and Watkins are FA's so they'll need a couple of bodies at WR.  Mercedes and Tonyan are FA's and Davis a RFA, so they'll need a couple of bodies there. 

Reed and Lowry are free agents with void years.  They'll need to spend at least one pick there.

Who knows with OL.  Tom, Walker, and Jones look like they could play the part but will need to make that big year two jump.  Those three and Rhyan will need to play roles next year.

Depth next year is going to be a lot of rookies/year-2 guys.

The rest of this season shouldn't be about trying to squeak into the playoffs. It should be just about letting the young guys play and getting a better idea of where you are next year. 

Kylin Hill needs carries. I honestly wouldn't be opposed to putting AJ Dillon on the trade block, though I don't think you get more than a 4th for him and probably a 5th. 
We'll get a 5th for MVS. 

Never been happier that the Packers were actually aggressive in pursuing a trade and a team turned it down. That 1st round pick for DJ Moore would be looking like a nightmare right now(if it's true it was offered and was turned down). 

As for relying on young guys, yeah, we will...but most teams do with young depth. 
QB-It all starts with Rodgers. If he doesn't come back, then you just purge the older players who cost like Amos. 

RB-Kylin Hill needs to get a lot of carries the rest of this year. I think this is a need. Dillon has one more year. Jones could be restructured...I guess. He's been worth every penny we paid, but you can't keep him at 20M cap hit. 

WRer-I think Doubs, Watson are are nice starting point. Lazard is more important to us than other teams. Gotta see if Toure really has the potential to be that slippery deep threat. For the love of God, do NOT play Watson this week. It's no longer about getting him ready for December/Jan football, it's about getting him ready for 2023. 2 concussions, even if one was minor, he's a kid. Don't throw him back out there. 
Cobb is back on the minimum....but only because he goes to the Kentucky Derby with Rodgers. 
Watkins is washed. Rodgers might actually be a nice player, but Rodgers(12) doesn't like him or the staff doesn't trust him, so he's gone. 

TE-Lewis will be back. He's cheap, you could probably play him at LT for a game if you needed to and get by he's such a great blocker(little hyperbole, but not much, he's still that good). 
Tonyan if he's cheap. Deguara is likely back. 

OL-I think Bakh is back. I've already made my argument why. You only save 6M cutting him, the following year you save ~20M. 
Tom I think will be a good player next year. 
Other than that, you pretty much have the entire OL under contract. Nijman is still a RFA for another year. So that's an obvious move. Caleb Jones and Rasheed Walker both looked great in camp and like they could be good players...but they were also UDFA/7th round picks because they couldn't keep their bodies in shape. 

Jenkins's play the last half of the year will dictate if the Packers bring him back.

 

DL-Clark, Slaton, Wyatt, Ford are all back. Slayton and Heflin are back. Reed has been fine, Lowry has not been as good as last year. No brainer to let Lowry walk. Reed would be fine for another cheap deal. 

Edge-Preston, Enagbare, Gary-
Enagbare has been a really nice rookie. He could be a really nice rotational piece. This is why I'd consider a big edge rusher like Murphy from Clemson. Another 6'6 275 LB edge with athleticism. 
Gary is a budding superstar, but his ascension hit a big snag. Preston is a good starter, but he's nothing special. 

MLBer-We're set here. Walker is going to be a stud, I think he's just a tick slow processing at the moment. Campbell, Carpenter will end up getting snaps here, Barnes has...I think one more year and McDuffie has looked really good. 

CB-We HAVE to figure out what is going on with Stokes. 
We also have to re-sign Nixon. 
Jaire is a cornerstone player and Douglas is a very good CB and he's paid like a #3/4 CB. So we have our CBs figured out, just have to hope Stokes isn't following in Savage's path. 

S-Savage has just not been good. He's not been good for a starting Safety, much less the expectations.
Amos is as reliable as they get. If you're keeping Rodgers, you keep Amos, if not, you go with Rudy Ford and see what you have with Abram(I don't think it's much). 

STs-You're getting this figured out. Just stay out of Rich Bisaccia's way. 

 

The salary cap. The Packers have 45 players under contract(not including Amos, Tonyan...players with void years obviously). When they roll over the cap space they have this year ~9M, they a couple million over next years cap ranking about 20th in the NFL. 
The Cap is always kinda meaningless year to year, though the long term implications always come home when you get THIS far over it. 

The Saints are 60+M over the cap again next year. We're not in Saints territory and with the cap probably going higher than the estimates and even OTC which shows conservative estimates has it at 265 in 2024. So it'll still be an issue, but one they can work around. But they need the picks they made this year to be the right choice and they need to have a good draft next year. 

And there are still so many questions...the biggest the two top paid players in Bakh and Rodgers. Is Bakh getting healthier or is this it? Again, if this is it, fine, he's still very valuable. But you need to make the LT of the future a top priority(really either way it needs to be...though maybe Tom is if he gets a little bigger). 
Do you have the defensive players or is it your scheme? The three young UGA players are going to determine a LOT. 

[CheezWizHed]

All the things you guys are pointing out are the main reasons that I've switched to the position of trading off Rodgers (if possible).  We kept pushing off cap hits for one more shot at the SB and it didn't work.  Really hard to see how we have a shot at filling out a SB level roster with all those coming holes.

Time to give Rodgers another shot elsewhere and cash out for draft picks to rebuild.  Holding on is only going to make the rebuild longer. 

[UpandIn]

34 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

I never said Driver didn't say this. I understand he did. I just think to say "Favre had barely mentioned retirement by the time they drafted Rodgers" is pretty indisputably untrue. 

"The three-time MVP said after the Packers' playoff loss to Minnesota in January he wanted to reflect before committing to playing a 15th NFL season following a year of personal tumult."

 

You implied that the annual Favre retirement saga is more just a Mandela effect type misconception that shouldn't have had any influence on a decision to draft Rodgers and I just believe that that clearly isn't true. 

Ok...when you misrepresent what I say, I guess it's not the end of it. 

1-I didn't "imply" it was just a "Mandela effect." I said Rodgers had BARELY mentioned retirement by the time they drafted Rodgers," and when they drafted Rodgers, they KNEW Favre was coming back. 

Thompson even made the statement to the effect that it would have been easier if he was in his 10th year and had more "capital" was the word he used IIRC because it was risky taking a player who wouldn't have an impact on the teams record the next couple years. 

I also said Favre had "barely mentioned it," and...as your link points out, that was also accurate;

Quote

Wide receiver Donald Driver created a controversy when he said at the Super Bowl he talks to Favre often and he felt Favre wasn't coming back. Speculation got so crazy that running back Ahman Green even got some radio play by saying "it could go either way."

 

Because Favre hasn't spoken publicly about his plans, it wasn't known before Thursday whether the retooled coaching staff, the stripping of Sherman's GM duties in favor of Ted Thompson or the loss of starting guards Marco Rivera and Mike Wahle in free agency would play a role in his decision.

Favre ALSO said at this time that he'd planned to play a "couple more years," if his body allowed it.

 

It's also common knowledge(at least I thought it was) that Aaron Rodgers wasn't even on the Packers radar where they were picking. They weren't targeting a QB, they picked one because they thought he was the BEST PLAYER AVAILABLE. 

This was the very start of the Favre retirement saga, it wasn't started by Favre, it was motivated by his wife's illness, it was brought up by Donald Driver and then Ahman Green mentioned it.

 

I didn't actually infer it was a Mandela like situation...but I suppose that IS more accurate than the Packers went and drafted a QB because Favre had been talking about retirement and they weren't sure where he stood. 

[UpandIn]

On 11/9/2022 at 12:31 PM, CheezWizHed said:

@UpandIn, no one can get the last word because you just used them all! ?

On a different note, I meant to highlight McDuffie's play last week.  He didn't have a ton of time, but looked very good out there.  This article sums it up well (and tickled my memory):  https://packerswire.usatoday.com/2022/11/08/packers-lb-isaiah-mcduffie-shines-vs-run-during-first-nfl-start/

But it also highlighted something of a concern I've had for a while with Walker.  He is terrible at getting off blocks.  I've noticed it for a while that once tied up, he is essentially "done", which seems like a big part of our run defense issues. But seeing the contrast between he and McDuffie in that article really shows the difference.  Its like Walker doesn't see the blocker (300+lb guard) or just makes not attempt to avoid it and simply goes quietly into the block without a fight.  The last play it looks like Walker is holding the edge, so that is understandable.  But the others has him walled off in the middle of the field while McDuffie is dodging right around his blocker to make the play.

Hope the rook gets that corrected quickly!

I've said this before, but I had professors tell me I needed to be more succinct. It never really caught on! I really do go back and read some posts and realize I babble at times or...just repeat things. 

Anyway, I love Walker and I think he's going to be an Pro-Bowl LBer...and this was specifically supposed to be a strength of his coming out. I haven't gone back and watched the last few games(because...why subject yourself to that misery)...but I noticed this particularly when they have him on that blind, boring blitz where they just send him on a straight blitz out of their nickel D. One that...never works and he gets swallowed up by the OG. I thought he'd played some really good games...the Washington game where he ran down Gibson a couple times. But he's also definitely got some holds in his game. He was just a one year starter. He'll get there. 

He and Wyatt. 

[UpandIn]

58 minutes ago, CheezWizHed said:

All the things you guys are pointing out are the main reasons that I've switched to the position of trading off Rodgers (if possible).  We kept pushing off cap hits for one more shot at the SB and it didn't work.  Really hard to see how we have a shot at filling out a SB level roster with all those coming holes.

Time to give Rodgers another shot elsewhere and cash out for draft picks to rebuild.  Holding on is only going to make the rebuild longer. 

It's hard to argue with this logic and if they go that way...which I sincerely doubt they will, I'd be good with that. I'd prefer running it back, making some changes. I don't think they're NEARLY as far away as this years team appears and they could definitely turn it around, but if they decide they're chasing their tails, so be it.

Once they lost Adams, then didn't have time to re-sign MVS(which I think would have made a big difference, he was just breaking out last year when he started dealing with injuries) they were going to need to rely on rookies/vets with LONG histories of injury.

The last 9 games of the season will be very telling. One of the problems going in this direction, we still have no clue what Jordan Love is. Even if he did play this year, he'd still be playing with the same offense that has been so bad that Rodgers has looked pretty mediocre with it.

Also, what are you asking for if you trade him? Are you happy to just get out from under that contract or are you looking for a 1st+?

I think the talent is on this team and I think we're kinda in that place as a team we were when, coming off a 4 win season, Favre said this was the most talented team he'd been on, but the holes are just too glaring. If you had confidence Bakh could be more reliable and that the WRers would develop, I'd be happy keeping this team together the next 2-3 years(it's really either 2-3 years or it's trade him this year). 

But if you could get a 1st from the Colts, Titans, Saints...even the Falcons(they're a surprisingly talented team)...it'd be hard to pass that up. 

 

And then what the hell do you do with Love? You can't pass up a QB in this class because you have a former 1st. If you think Will Levis is a superstar,, you have to take him, or Stroud or whoever. Even with Rodgers we took Brian Brohm in the 2nd(and he was a projected top 10 pick if he'd come out a year earlier, so a clear sign they were bringing in some type of competition). 

 

The good news is the cap could EASILY be 275M by 2024, so the Cap situation isn't really as bad as it looks(it ain't good either though). 

[CheezWizHed]

Even if you think one or two of our WRs are going to develop and if Bakh's knee is going to be sound... you still have to deal with numerous FAs, player options, etc (listed above) along with a tightening cap.  If we could simply keep this team, add draft picks and develop a year then maybe you run the team another try.  But we somehow to have resign people to fill the holes...

[HarveysWBs]

So, until this point, I had been under the impression that Rodgers’ play had really fallen off this year, and that he was if not the reason the offense is struggling, probably in the top 3 (O-line struggles and game planning potentially being the other big factors, with some definite learning curve struggles by the young pass catchers).

But after watching this (which is a devastating breakdown of the Lions game, which Kurt Warner says is consistent with the struggles of previous weeks as well), I think I’m all the way onboard with this being Gute’s fault/roster construction failure.  It’s a long video, but well worth the time.  Warner is not totally biased towards 12 as a fellow QB and criticized him where it’s due, but mostly explains why an NFL quarterback can’t win with these pass catchers as they are currently performing.  Lazard needs to be much better by this point, but can’t seem to keep his feet, Watkins is absolutely wasting space and almost single-handedly torpedoed the offense, and the rooks + Amari are incapable of winning against press man or of playing technically sound.

All of the above is on Gute first and foremost.  Maybe the rookies become something, but expecting them to be your only backup plan when Lazard and Watkins and Cobb (predictably) all got hurt is malpractice.

And then, even when those players are on the field, for them to be so unsound is, as a lesser but still significant issue, a searing indictment of the positional coaches failing to hold them accountable and instill proper technique.

And for MLF, I’m not ready to lay this at his feet yet, but he’s supposed to be the leader. If this doesn’t get corrected, it highlights what is probably the biggest failing of his entire tenure, which is an inability to choose assistants wisely and get the most out of them.

Rodgers can be better, and he should be for what we’re paying, but he’s not going to make a Michelin star meal with the McNuggets he’s been handed.  This is a disaster, and I have no idea what Gute thought was going to happen.

[sveumrules]

Right now all arrows seem to be pointing towards a return to the barren post-Lombardi / pre-Wolf decades. Does anywhere track how many spots open up every year on the season ticket list?

If Rodgers makes it to the end of the year healthy my best guess is he/MLF/Gute get one more year to see if they can cash in on the massive chip AR12 will surely have on his shoulder.

If they do decide to deal Aaron and start the inevitable teardown instead, I just hope whoever is in charge by then knows what they’re doing.

[LouisEly]

2 hours ago, HarveysWBs said:

This is a disaster, and I have no idea what Gute thought was going to happen.

Gute was thinking that he is very salary cap strapped because of 12 and Bakh, and that Adams was going to return because they offered him more than the Raiders.

[HarveysWBs]

1 hour ago, LouisEly said:

Gute was thinking that he is very salary cap strapped because of 12 and Bakh, and that Adams was going to return because they offered him more than the Raiders.

Well that was a pretty thin tightrope he tried to walk.  We’re gonna need a scraper for the pavement down below.

[adambr2]

1 hour ago, LouisEly said:

Gute was thinking that he is very salary cap strapped because of 12 and Bakh, and that Adams was going to return because they offered him more than the Raiders.

Gute seems to be a master of "I had some ideas and even a plan but then my plans fell through and I had no backup plan at all so I just winged it."

[LouisEly]

20 hours ago, adambr2 said:

Gute seems to be a master of "I had some ideas and even a plan but then my plans fell through and I had no backup plan at all so I just winged it."

What kind of backup plan can you have when you're up against the cap because you are trying to keep HoF/All-Pro/Pro-Bowl caliber players and have to rely on rookies/2nd year/UDFAs for backups? 

The NFL is rigged this way to prevent the same teams from being good every year.  The draft, the salary cap, the scheduling... it's all designed to rotate the teams at the top.

Yeah, things might be different if they had drafted McLaurin instead of Sternberger and Higgins/Pittman instead of Love.  But lots of other teams are saying the same thing about passing on those guys; the Packers weren't the only ones.  I also think that Gute didn't expect that run on WRs in the first round of the draft this year.  Nobody drafts perfect, but you can't have a backup plan when you have no cap room for veterans to fill holes.