Game 9: Green Bay @ Detroit - Sunday, November 6th 12:00 PM CT

[OldHeidelberg]

4 minutes ago, homer said:

that last play just encapsulates the season: it's 4th down, you don't convert you lose, you call a timeout, and then can't figure out the play until play clock is zero forcing a prayer to no one. 

I think they were even planning on taking the timeout so they could look at the D, still couldn't figure out how to run a play

[adambr2]

Hot take:

 

Matt Lafleur is a really, really bad HC who has been hidden the last few years by the greatness of the Rodgers/Adams connection and is basically lost now. 

[SeaBass]

Aaron Rodgers had a terrible game. So many bad throws, throwing behind the receivers (and no not on purpose), under-throwing receivers, ridiculous interceptions. In the first half I hated that they were going for it on 4th downs when they could just take 3 points, like what part of this offense is giving anyone the confidence to convert anything? What an absolutely putrid showing today.

[Oxy]

It's bad when you lose to a team that in the grand scheme of things doesn't even really WANT to win.  Pretty sure the Lions GM would've been very happy with a "moral" victory but an actual loss...

[HarryDoyle]

38 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

Hot take:

 

Matt Lafleur is a really, really bad HC who has been hidden the last few years by the greatness of the Rodgers/Adams connection and is basically lost now. 

Dan Devine thinks this is a poorly coached team.

[GAME05]

Is MLF a bad coach or is it more his DC and OC making him look bad? But then the captain usually goes down with the ship.

>Matt Lafleur is a really, really bad HC who has been hidden the last few years by the greatness of the Rodgers/Adams connection and is basically lost now. 

I feel like it's been since Holmgren since we've had a talented HC. How many Super Bowls have we not seen because of it?

[HarryDoyle]

Not so fun fact: The Brewers have won more recently than the Packers.

[yourout]

1 hour ago, adambr2 said:

Hot take:

 

Matt Lafleur is a really, really bad HC who has been hidden the last few years by the greatness of the Rodgers/Adams connection and is basically lost now. 

No argument here.

Packers are at least 2 years and a new coach from a chance at a super bowl.

And probably a new GM.

[Sixtolezcano]

The Packers could very realistically end the season with a 5-12 record with losses to the Cowboys, Titans, Eagles, Rams, Dolphins, and Vikings. The only 2 games that I would think they might be favored are against the Bears and Lions. That should work out to a top 10 draft pick.

[yourout]

12 minutes ago, Sixtolezcano said:

The Packers could very realistically end the season with a 5-12 record with losses to the Cowboys, Titans, Eagles, Rams, Dolphins, and Vikings. The only 2 games that I would think they might be favored are against the Bears and Lions. That should work out to a top 10 draft pick.

Right now if I had to bet....they will lose to the bears in Chicago.

[GAME05]

Well, they're also going to end up winning a game they should lose just so everyone gets a tiny glimmer of hope before it's dashed the following week.

[CheezWizHed]

6 hours ago, SeaBass said:

Aaron Rodgers had a terrible game. So many bad throws, throwing behind the receivers (and no not on purpose), under-throwing receivers, ridiculous interceptions. In the first half I hated that they were going for it on 4th downs when they could just take 3 points, like what part of this offense is giving anyone the confidence to convert anything? What an absolutely putrid showing today.

This was my big take-away.  Rodgers had a few good throws, but was often off... No blaming WRs this time either.  Very obvious misses today.  That last sequence of throws were out quick and off his back foot...floaters to nowhere.  Not sure where he was today...

[UpandIn]

23 minutes ago, CheezWizHed said:

This was my big take-away.  Rodgers had a few good throws, but was often off... No blaming WRs this time either.  Very obvious misses today.  That last sequence of throws were out quick and off his back foot...floaters to nowhere.  Not sure where he was today...

Yup. And the OL wasn't great, they couldn't get the running game going(but with Zach Tom playing, he's not physical enough to really move guys). 

A couple weeks ago I took issue with his...behavior on field and some off-field comments(EDIT-I meant to say I thought he'd been much more positive this past week and...walked some of that back a bit). 

I know he was hopeful at the trade deadline, but the Packers went out and offered a #1 for DJ Moore(thank you Carolina for passing on that) and a #2 for Claypool(not sure why they wouldn't meet the 2nd and 5th Denver was asking for, but maybe it's because that wasn't actually their asking price). 

But the two picks, 100% on him. Great play by Hutchinson sniffing that out and dropping, but loft that up there. 
The 1st, he didn't have a throwing lane.

 

Bakhtiari coming back in on that final drive tells me that his knee IS structurally sound....it just hurts. That means it's not going away and I'd guess(pointing out I do not have an MD in front of my name) that his knee is bone on bone and or at least close to it. 

So the thumb probably hurts causing his throws to be off. He missed that Toure deep ball he'd normally make. There were other 3rd down balls he threw low. They were catchable, but he's just off.
The WRers can't stay healthy enough. 

#1 priority for this team this off-season upon learning what Rodgers plans on doing is go out and use that ~10-12 pick on a guy like Parris Johnson or Broderick Jones. Both guys who are freak athletes who can also play guard. 

Also, again, fire Joe Barry. The defense wasn't the problem, but it SHOULD be a suffocating, dominant D and it's just...not. It's no the problem, that's very clearly the two highest paid players in AAV on the team, Rodgers and Bakh not playing to their expectations...but this defense was supposed to be Legion of Boom type dominant and it's been, "Rodgers era good." Which is to say, just not terrible. 

[CheezWizHed]

Rodgers was taken off the injury list for his thumb this week and he practices normally (if I'm recalling correctly).  I'm not sure how much we can blame the thumb...  I think he got back to throwing without being set or ready...and it isn't going where he wants it to go. Lots of short deep passes this year.  

With aging and a suffocating cap hit, I'm becoming more and more ready to move on.  If that 1st round pick gives us a chance at a great QB next year... 

[UpandIn]

3 minutes ago, CheezWizHed said:

Rodgers was taken off the injury list for his thumb this week and he practices normally (if I'm recalling correctly).  I'm not sure how much we can blame the thumb...  I think he got back to throwing without being set or ready...and it isn't going where he wants it to go. Lots of short deep passes this year.  

With aging and a suffocating cap hit, I'm becoming more and more ready to move on.  If that 1st round pick gives us a chance at a great QB next year... 

I don't buy that thumb's healthy. He's holding it constantly and said it was still bothering him. Plus, Bakh was off the injury report for his knee...so, I'm not sure that means it's healthy.  

BUT I think you're also right that he's fallen back into old habits, throwing off his heels, making simple throws from a poor platform when it's NOT necessary. Just because you CAN make a throw falling backward doesn't mean it should be your go-to. Nobody is talented enough to throw like that consistently. 

I don't particularly care about the cap hit because we're a non-profit and we can spend 300M a year and still make 100M, so we could stay on the figurative hamster wheel indefinitely(though obviously it's preferable to not be in that situation). Also just about every contender is in bad shape cap wise, all catching up from 2020. But if you're telling me the next Jake Herbert(Will Levis) or Desaun Watson(Bryce Young)...sans the...massage issues, if they're available, I'm good with that too. 

And if we can't get the QB we think is a difference maker, a franchise QB, at least get the OL ready for when we do. Drafting a QB would mean Rodgers is retiring...I'd think. No way he's gonna come back if we use a top ~15 pick on another QB. So we could take the next BPA and if Love isn't good enough, then we'll likely be picking in the top 10 again in '24. 

I also really do believe in the pure talent on this team. 
Jaire, Jenkins, Gary, Watson, Doubs, Quay, Wyatt, Enagbare, Tom, Toure, Myers, Dillon, Kylin Hill(who'll take Aaron Jones role next year I think). Stokes, Slaton, Clark...just too many players who aren't healthy or playing consistent. Bakh is the embodiment of that. You know he's elite when he's on the field. You don't know if he'll be on the field play to play. 

We tried to mesh the young with the veterans and we are clearly a year away and questions remain about Bakh and company. 

 

We can also still trade Rodgers this year. The Cap hit would be minimal and I'm sure there are teams who'd be happy to take him. Maybe Tampa wants a QB and he wants to play with Evans, Godwin and company? Tenn wanted him, Nola. And it'd be an 8M cap hit to trade him and the other team would only have a 15M cap hit(you'd have to figure out the roster bonus, but this contract was structured in a way that Rodgers had autonomy over his career).

My feeling is he plays another 2 years. But regardless, you need to keep developing that OL. Detroit has built their team that way. By the time the draft comes around, the Packers will already have made their mind up on Rodgers roster bonus which triggers those massive cap hits in '24 and '25.

 

[CheezWizHed]

Despite being an owner, I'm not concerned by profit. ? By cap hit, I'm referring to both the amount of money Rodgers consumes on the cap and the dead money accumulated.  It is highly restricting us from actually adding talent that we need.  I have no issues trading Rodgers at this point, because I don't think we can construct a SB winning roster right now.  

Next year's cap is going to cause us to make some tough decisions on Jones, Bakh, Rodgers, whomever else. Maybe we can do the gymnastics to keep them all... but then we don't have room to adjust and fill gaps.  We knew we were painting ourselves into a corner with the cap to try to extend the SB window, but this season makes it look like that window was closed. 

For the players you listed, I agree that some are playing injured.  Some just need experience.  Some is probably poor coaching.  But some of them will simply bust (or just be "meh" players).  I know you love your Green and Gold goggles, but not everyone you list is going to be a NFL quality player. ?

 

[Sixtolezcano]

On 11/6/2022 at 11:19 PM, UpandIn said:

I don't particularly care about the cap hit because we're a non-profit and we can spend 300M a year and still make 100M, so we could stay on the figurative hamster wheel indefinitely(though obviously it's preferable to not be in that situation). Also just about every contender is in bad shape cap wise, all catching up from 2020. But if you're telling me the next Jake Herbert(Will Levis) or Desaun Watson(Bryce Young)...sans the...massage issues, if they're available, I'm good with that too. 

And if we can't get the QB we think is a difference maker, a franchise QB, at least get the OL ready for when we do. Drafting a QB would mean Rodgers is retiring...I'd think. No way he's gonna come back if we use a top ~15 pick on another QB. So we could take the next BPA and if Love isn't good enough, then we'll likely be picking in the top 10 again in '24. 

I also really do believe in the pure talent on this team. 
Jaire, Jenkins, Gary, Watson, Doubs, Quay, Wyatt, Enagbare, Tom, Toure, Myers, Dillon, Kylin Hill(who'll take Aaron Jones role next year I think). Stokes, Slaton, Clark...just too many players who aren't healthy or playing consistent. Bakh is the embodiment of that. You know he's elite when he's on the field. You don't know if he'll be on the field play to play. 

We tried to mesh the young with the veterans and we are clearly a year away and questions remain about Bakh and company. 

 

We can also still trade Rodgers this year. The Cap hit would be minimal and I'm sure there are teams who'd be happy to take him. Maybe Tampa wants a QB and he wants to play with Evans, Godwin and company? Tenn wanted him, Nola. And it'd be an 8M cap hit to trade him and the other team would only have a 15M cap hit(you'd have to figure out the roster bonus, but this contract was structured in a way that Rodgers had autonomy over his career).

My feeling is he plays another 2 years. But regardless, you need to keep developing that OL. Detroit has built their team that way. By the time the draft comes around, the Packers will already have made their mind up on Rodgers roster bonus which triggers those massive cap hits in '24 and '25.

 

The Packers profit in 2021 was $71.7M not $100M with $579M in revenue (also remember their max, salary is capped so they can’t spend indiscriminately). I work for a non-profit and you are sadly mistaken if you don’t think they consider their budget and profit line. Actually, they are more likely to consider it compared with a for-profit company.
 

I also doubt that A. Jones will not be a Packer in 2023 as he is the only playmaker on this offense. If the Pack are in the top 10 of the draft next year it would be senseless for them to not select a QB with the talent coming out with Rogers turning 39 next month. I also doubt there will be much of a return in trade for Rogers with his current performance this year, his age, and along with the high likelihood that he will retire.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Depends on your definition of "much." A team that thinks it is a QB away would happily take Aaron Rodgers and find a way to pay him. The problem is there aren't a lot of teams that don't either have a QB or who they think is a QB soon. 

But I highly doubt Rodgers's supposed "decline" would be the reason teams wouldn't take him. He just won two MVPs and is throwing to nobody behind a battered OL. He's not playing well but I'm betting the consensus would be to give him a mulligan. 

He is old but I haven't seen the decline in skills, same thing I was saying in 2018. He can still run unbelievably well for his age. He can still throw. They suck but he still makes a "wow" play every week. He's just playing desperate a lot, and timing is off, which leads to slop and forcing stuff.

If multiple teams were willing to play the shell of Peyton Manning to stand around and toss ducks, there's no way somebody wouldn't take on Rodgers. 

[UpandIn]

7 hours ago, Sixtolezcano said:

The Packers profit in 2021 was $71.7M not $100M with $579M in revenue (also remember their max, salary is capped so they can’t spend indiscriminately). I work for a non-profit and you are sadly mistaken if you don’t think they consider their budget and profit line. Actually, they are more likely to consider it compared with a for-profit company.
 

I also doubt that A. Jones will not be a Packer in 2023 as he is the only playmaker on this offense. If the Pack are in the top 10 of the draft next year it would be senseless for them to not select a QB with the talent coming out with Rogers turning 39 next month. I also doubt there will be much of a return in trade for Rogers with his current performance this year, his age, and along with the high likelihood that he will retire.

1st-Each NFL team got 335M dollars from the league on the 1st day of the league year. 
Because of the increase in TV revenue, that number will be ~400M next year. The Packers lost about ~60M from their rainy day fund. 

2nd-The Packers are spending about 270M in cash on contracts this year...so yes, there IS a salary cap and there are a million and one ways around it. If it was the NBA, the Packers wouldn't be able to pay Jaire and Rodgers ~75M in cash this year and have 48M in salary cap hits. 

These are important distinctions.

3rd-I'm quite sure the non-profit you work at operates VERY differently than the Packers, and I also never ONCE suggested the people running it don't "consider their budget and profit line." That's a bizarre reading of what I said. 

I said I DIDN'T care. And you kinda made my point for me. In a year in which the Packers have spent more CASH on players than the total salary cap by a significant margin and had a 60 million dollar "dip" from the stock market in their nearly half a BILLION dollar rainy day fund a year before the NFL's 110 BILLION dollar TV deal kicks in, meaning they'll be receiving 70M(at least, they're still negotiating the new red zone package last I heard, something they charged 1B for last year and are looking at close to 3B in their newest contract, meaning each team will receive tens of millions MORE in revenue) I think I was pretty accurate. 

The Packers can most certainly continue to spend more in cash than the salary cap for as long as they so choose.

 

Quote

they are more likely to consider it compared with a for-profit company.

Doubt it. At least as it pertains to the Packers. Their primary agenda isn't to maximize revenues, it's to create revenue in service of the Football team. They're not curing cancer or running a food bank, they're handing out 150M dollar contracts for 3 years in a league that's on pace to generate 25 BILLION a year by 2027.

 

So I'm not sure what your point is. If not for a temporary downturn in their rainy day fund and record cash over cap spending, the Packers revenue would have been ~150M? Much of which would have just gone into their rainy day fund. 

What is the point of this "correction?"

 

7 hours ago, Sixtolezcano said:

I also doubt that A. Jones will not be a Packer in 2023 as he is the only playmaker on this offense. If the Pack are in the top 10 of the draft next year it would be senseless for them to not select a QB with the talent coming out with Rogers turning 39 next month. I also doubt there will be much of a return in trade for Rogers with his current performance this year, his age, and along with the high likelihood that he will retire.

I do not expect Aaron Jones back. Kylin Hill isn't Jones, but he's a similar type of runner and Jones cap hit IS actually prohibitive. While...again, you can spend 50M more a year on players than the salary cap, retaining Aaron Jones would likely require a new contract or a 20M+ cap hit.

So maybe they re-sign him...he's taken far less money already to stay in GB, but maybe they decide a 20M cap hit is worth it for a RB. 

If they decide to draft a new QB, I would guess that would make it that much more far fetched.

Re; trading Rodgers, of course Rodgers trade value isn't going to be anywhere near what it was 2 years ago or this year. I sincerely doubt playing with this OL and this receiving crew and his level of play this year is going to diminish his value THAT much. The fact that Denver has already gotten their QB, SF, LAR...that'd do it. 

The small number of teams who would both be in need of a QB+have the talent on their roster for it to make sense+ Rodgers age is what's going to make his value drop, plus his strange contract that has a massive roster bonus that triggers 2024 and 2025 guarantees would also complicate matters. But IF Tennessee, Indy or another team along those lines wanted Rodgers, I'm sure they'd make it work. If Josh Allen's UCL tears, Buffalo would be a team set up to take on 1 year of Rodgers and get his contract. 

I don't have a clue. Would you get a 1st? A 2nd and a conditional 1st like Carson Wentz got? I'd think that'd be the minimum Aaron Rodgers would go for, but I don't know. There's a whole season to play out before we get to that point.

 

Finally-Yes, if there is a great QB in this draft, that would make sense. Will Levis, Young, Stroud(he's not the same as the other OSU QBs...he's not just an athlete with a big arm, he's got incredible touch). And you could let Jordan Love play a year if Rodgers retired or if he was traded.

It totally depends on where they're picking. There's also a Lawrence Taylor like edge rusher in this draft in Will Anderson. I'd be fine taking him as well. 

There are a lot of directions the Packers could go, they could double back down, out-spend the cap again, and kick it down the road further counting on their young WRers and what are likely to be high selections to make a bigger impact next year or they could tear it down. What they do will depend on a whole lot of options. 

The one thing that they should be doing now is making Jerry Grey the DC, put Devonte Wyatt into the starting lineup with Enagbare, Rudy Ford and...I suppose try and get Darnell Savage back on track so if nothing else, you can trade him...because he looks bad. 

[UpandIn]

7 hours ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

Depends on your definition of "much." A team that thinks it is a QB away would happily take Aaron Rodgers and find a way to pay him. The problem is there aren't a lot of teams that don't either have a QB or who they think is a QB soon. 

But I highly doubt Rodgers's supposed "decline" would be the reason teams wouldn't take him. He just won two MVPs and is throwing to nobody behind a battered OL. He's not playing well but I'm betting the consensus would be to give him a mulligan. 

He is old but I haven't seen the decline in skills, same thing I was saying in 2018. He can still run unbelievably well for his age. He can still throw. They suck but he still makes a "wow" play every week. He's just playing desperate a lot, and timing is off, which leads to slop and forcing stuff.

If multiple teams were willing to play the shell of Peyton Manning to stand around and toss ducks, there's no way somebody wouldn't take on Rodgers. 

The 4-12 Jets traded a 2nd round pick for Brett Favre at 39 years old. So yeah, my definition of "much" would be a couple 2nds, with at least one being a conditional 1st round pick. 

And I also agree, teams aren't going to look at Aaron Rodgers and his stat line this year and put it on him. The Lions game...sure, he threw two INCREDIBLY uncharacteristic picks. 

It is just totally wild speculation to guess if Rodgers would accept a trade which...while not technically a requirement, with the complicated contract and the option that guarantees the '24 and '25 money, he'd need to work that out with a team. I always assumed that was put in there to give Aaron Rodgers compete autonomy of how his career ends in GB(as he should). 

I'm reasonably sure Rodgers isn't going to want to go out like this, so I'd expect him back. I'd also be alright if he retired. 

[UpandIn]

On 11/7/2022 at 8:40 AM, CheezWizHed said:

Despite being an owner, I'm not concerned by profit. ? By cap hit, I'm referring to both the amount of money Rodgers consumes on the cap and the dead money accumulated.  It is highly restricting us from actually adding talent that we need.  I have no issues trading Rodgers at this point, because I don't think we can construct a SB winning roster right now.  

Next year's cap is going to cause us to make some tough decisions on Jones, Bakh, Rodgers, whomever else. Maybe we can do the gymnastics to keep them all... but then we don't have room to adjust and fill gaps.  We knew we were painting ourselves into a corner with the cap to try to extend the SB window, but this season makes it look like that window was closed. 

For the players you listed, I agree that some are playing injured.  Some just need experience.  Some is probably poor coaching.  But some of them will simply bust (or just be "meh" players).  I know you love your Green and Gold goggles, but not everyone you list is going to be a NFL quality player. ?

 

Yeah, I understood what you meant when you were talking about the cap. I'm saying because of how much money the Packers get just from the NFL right off the top(expected to be 400M....just handed out, first day of the league year)...the Packers COULD just keep this cycle going as long as they wanted. Just use cash to stay ahead of the cap via signing bonuses and void years. 

And you'll have dead cap hits and as you re-sign players, they'll have low cap hits to off-set the dead cap. 

It's not ideal, but Rodgers isn't really preventing us from doing much. 

'22-28M cap hit
'23-31M cap hit (massive dead cap if they excercise the options of 99M). 
'24-40M cap hit -24M dead cap

And the cap will be going up by an easy estimate of 20M a year. 

On 11/7/2022 at 8:40 AM, CheezWizHed said:

For the players you listed, I agree that some are playing injured.  Some just need experience.  Some is probably poor coaching.  But some of them will simply bust (or just be "meh" players).  I know you love your Green and Gold goggles, but not everyone you list is going to be a NFL quality player. ?

I mean...I kinda just listed the top players, rookies who'd already proven themselves...and then a couple guys who are certainly possible "meh" type players. 

Toure, Dillon(at least the way he's being used), the other two rookie WRers may never hit. Other than that, I think they're all already good players or rookies who are actually playing well like Tom and Enagbare.

Maybe Jenkins won't ever be the same...but I'm skeptical. 
Gary's injury is...devastating. 

The Packers had been negotiating with each player on contract extensions(reportedly) with Gary being the priority. What the hell do we do now with those two? No way we can extend Jenkins for ~15M a year at this point, right? 
And as likely as Gary is to return to an elite level after an ACL injury, we're kinda going through hell right now as both Jenkins and Bakhtiari have suffered injuries and not come back. 

 

I don't know, I'd need a whole lot of zanax or valium if I were running the Packers. This team is like playing Tetris...and you KNOW there's a way the pieces fit together and you just need a couple pieces, but you just can't QUITE get them to fit together...and then when you do get the right piece...it breaks(I guess that's where my analogy falls apart).