Packers 2023 Discussion Thread

[OldSchoolSnapper]

1 hour ago, homer said:

I am sad he got hurt but I really don't miss this crap:

 

 

What aspect of it? The QB expressing which play designs he doesn't like sounds about as nothingburger as it gets and something that should probably happen. Or just that it's in the media?

[homer]

1 hour ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

Idk why people are acting like went 4-13 last year.  That was a really young team that started 7-4 and then sputtered. Even without adding Rodgers it is likely they take a leap this season anyway just because of how talented and young the team is. 

That said, yeah, I expected them to be in the AFCCG with Rodgers. I think they have a large variance of wins. Wilson totally sucks it's not crazy to see them go 6-11. I think they are too good defensively to be that bad. I won't be surprise at all if they are a low-seed playoff team without Rodgers.

Ok so their floor is 6 wins

[SeaBass]

59 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

Idk why people are acting like went 4-13 last year.  That was a really young team that started 7-4 and then sputtered. Even without adding Rodgers it is likely they take a leap this season anyway just because of how talented and young the team is. 

That said, yeah, I expected them to be in the AFCCG with Rodgers. I think they have a large variance of wins. Wilson totally sucks it's not crazy to see them go 6-11. I think they are too good defensively to be that bad. I won't be surprise at all if they are a low-seed playoff team without Rodgers.

The Jets won 5 of their 7 games against backup QBs and their defense was the healthiest unit in football. These are things you can't really count on to happen again in a new season added on top of a punishing schedule. One of their defensive starters is already out for the season (Chuck Clark/ACL) and EDGE Carl Lawson was out for the Bills game.

Does that mean they can't have a winning year? Of course not. But even what they did last season, with that great defense, wasn't as great as it looks at face value.

They need their offense to score more points which is the same problem they had last year. They've lucked into one win with an OT punt return TD. Check that one off the list of reasonably repeatable occurrences.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

32 minutes ago, SeaBass said:

 

They need their offense to score more points which is the same problem they had last year. They've lucked into one win with an OT punt return TD. Check that one off the list of reasonably repeatable occurrences.

I mean I think that is pretty dismissive of what happened, the game isn't won on a single play just because it's the last play. Just the fact they didn't lay down and die like 90% of teams after the first series is pretty telling. 

I think it is pretty funny that because Rodgers got hurt, the whole thing is the Jets suck and Allen laid an egg. If this exact same game unfolded and Rodgers never got hurt the whole narrative would be how awesome their defense is.

I think their defense is being dismissed. They are extremely good up front, they will be that way with or without Rodgers. Are they going to get the same Zach Wilson or can he at least be, I dunno, Matt Cassel or something.

[Joseph Zarr]

2 hours ago, homer said:

I am sad he got hurt but I really don't miss this crap:

 

 

AND, to riff off this point:

I can almost guarantee we don't see this litany of goodness with Old Man Rodgers (bless him and his legacy) at the helm. It was just, well, time. 

 

[Joseph Zarr]

Also, this has me all sorts of 'Ohhhh, yes please':

 

[Fear The Chorizo]

3 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

I mean I think that is pretty dismissive of what happened, the game isn't won on a single play just because it's the last play. Just the fact they didn't lay down and die like 90% of teams after the first series is pretty telling. 

I think it is pretty funny that because Rodgers got hurt, the whole thing is the Jets suck and Allen laid an egg. If this exact same game unfolded and Rodgers never got hurt the whole narrative would be how awesome their defense is.

I think their defense is being dismissed. They are extremely good up front, they will be that way with or without Rodgers. Are they going to get the same Zach Wilson or can he at least be, I dunno, Matt Cassel or something.

The Jets defense played well last night and is very good indeed - but they actually forced zero of the 4 turnovers Allen was responsible for.  DBs made good catches on balls thrown to them, sure - but had Allen not made three terrible throws into coverage that had zero chance of being completed or simply caught a shotgun snap, Buffalo probably scores at least 6 more points by default and the Jets wouldn't have received short fields that really helped account for 10 of their 16 points in regulation.  Had Allen not played horrible and mistake-prone football, Buffalo wins that game by 10 even if they aren't that good.

The Jets will really need to lean on their good defense again this year - if that unit remains near totally healthy like it did last season when they played against a last place schedule to the tune of a 7-10 record, then yeah they could probably stumble up the standings to finish near 0.500.  I'm not buying it at this point, though.

[Joseph Zarr]

All I want to know about that Bills/Jets debacles is one thing:

WHY, oh WHY, did the Bills move so far away from RB James Cook? He was absolutely dealing. The Jets had no answer for Cook in the flats. None. He was routinely picking up 5-10 yards. It was eerily reminiscent to A-Rod meltdowns when the Packers somehow mysteriously left Aaron Jones in the dust. Eerily similar. Similar result too - albeit, A-Rod would have most likely just forced a litany of incompletions whereas Allen simply threw deep incompletions in the form of INT's.

[adambr2]

1 hour ago, Joseph Zarr said:

AND, to riff off this point:

I can almost guarantee we don't see this litany of goodness with Old Man Rodgers (bless him and his legacy) at the helm. It was just, well, time. 

 

I can't tell you how many times the past 3 years or so that I've seen the Packers just sort of chucked the ball 30 yards downfield on 3rd and 2 and pull out my hair thinking, "MLF can't possibly be calling these plays."

[Fear The Chorizo]

2 hours ago, adambr2 said:

I can't tell you how many times the past 3 years or so that I've seen the Packers just sort of chucked the ball 30 yards downfield on 3rd and 2 and pull out my hair thinking, "MLF can't possibly be calling these plays."

This also goes back to the end of the McCarthy era in Green Bay - when they insisted on playing with a sugar huddle-type tempo and keep the same offensive personnel on the field at all times and became incredibly predictable with their route trees and formations, likely because Rodgers fell in love with hunting for free plays when defenders were trying to substitute.  McCarthy's strength as a playcaller early on (including the year the Packers won the super bowl) was putting a ton on film and having all sorts of personnel groupings/formations.  Once Rodgers got to the level of veteran QB status who knew what all defenses were doing, he very likely handcuffed offensive creativity in effort to be the smartest guy on the field - and once their offensive personnel around him couldn't remain elite due to age or contract limitations of the roster they weren't good enough to make plays in the absence of game planning creativity.  Instead it just turned into Rodgers waiting for plays to break down and try playing sandlot football all too often.

[BrewerFan]

3 hours ago, Joseph Zarr said:

Also, this has me all sorts of 'Ohhhh, yes please':

 

It is wild that Musgrave is in that group given how good those guys played. I don't think we saw a fraction of what Musgrave is capable of(other than getting open and beating coverage) and he still thinks Musgrave is a guy who's got "it." 

I think he dealt with a lot of nerves and he's going to get MUCH better. I think those two plays where they had a shot on a TD if he keeps his feet...I think they'll convert those type of plays in the future!

 

Reed was the best from what I could see yesterday, but I wasn't really spending time specifically watching his blocking save for a few plays. So that's...wildly encouraging. So close to 3 catches, 2 TDs and over 100 yards. 

[BrewerFan]

5 minutes ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

This also goes back to the end of the McCarthy era in Green Bay - when they insisted on playing with a sugar huddle-type tempo and keep the same offensive personnel on the field at all times and became incredibly predictable with their route trees and formations, likely because Rodgers fell in love with hunting for free plays when defenders were trying to substitute.  McCarthy's strength as a playcaller early on (including the year the Packers won the super bowl) was putting a ton on film and having all sorts of personnel groupings/formations.  Once Rodgers got to the level of veteran QB status who knew what all defenses were doing, he very likely handcuffed offensive creativity in effort to be the smartest guy on the field - and once their offensive personnel around him couldn't remain elite due to age or contract limitations of the roster they weren't good enough to make plays in the absence of game planning creativity.  Instead it just turned into Rodgers waiting for plays to break down and try playing sandlot football all too often.

That seems fair. I remember a compilation of McCarthy and all his brilliant play calls(this was in rebuttal to the argument that he'd become vanilla and carried by Rodgers). And it really kinda surprised me. There were plays with Cobbs and Adams in the backfield with one running an angle route and one running a wheel route and then Nelson and whomever else on the outside. That one stands out, but there were a lot of more specific examples. This was when he got the job with the Cowboys.

 

I don't think this is an indictment on Rodgers personally...his results speak for themselves, but I think it shows that MLF is a more capable play caller and McCarthy probably caught a bit too much heat for us. 

[LouisEly]

7 hours ago, homer said:

I am sad he got hurt but I really don't miss this crap:

 

I don't think Rodgers is wrong about that.  Bakh never cut block anyone.  Maybe that's because he was just that damn good.  Maybe Rodgers is just used to having one of the best in the business on his blind side.  Maybe it's because the Packers have had better OCs/line coaches than they've been given credit for.

[BrewerFan]

4 hours ago, LouisEly said:

I don't think Rodgers is wrong about that.  Bakh never cut block anyone.  Maybe that's because he was just that damn good.  Maybe Rodgers is just used to having one of the best in the business on his blind side.  Maybe it's because the Packers have had better OCs/line coaches than they've been given credit for.

I wonder why this isn't a HUGE talking point now?

And I get Rodgers position on this one. Even if he got...a bit tiresome with some of his stuff, I think they should have(and did) value his intake on what he was comfortable with.

Two plays, two times they tried to cut and two times he was hit. 4 snaps and his career may be over and the Packers lose a 1st(which I've been told is just unacceptable to talk about because he's injured, but that was always going to be the case. If he stayed healthy, he'd have gotten to 65%). 

[CheezWizHed]

11 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

I wonder why this isn't a HUGE talking point now?

And I get Rodgers position on this one. Even if he got...a bit tiresome with some of his stuff, I think they should have(and did) value his intake on what he was comfortable with.

Two plays, two times they tried to cut and two times he was hit. 4 snaps and his career may be over and the Packers lose a 1st(which I've been told is just unacceptable to talk about because he's injured, but that was always going to be the case. If he stayed healthy, he'd have gotten to 65%). 

The tweet was after his injury, but I wonder if the original complaint was before or after? Rodgers is a spin master who always makes himself look good. 

[BrewerFan]

2 minutes ago, CheezWizHed said:

The tweet was after his injury, but I wonder if the original complaint was before or after? Rodgers is a spin master who always makes himself look good. 

Of course he is, but on this one, I tend to believe the tweet, that he had expressed SOME level of concern.

A huge part of his career has been built on off-script plays. When you're cutting like that, you're just trying to get the DE's arms down so they can't knock down the pass. 

I guess my question would be, if this was a concern, why were they still doing it? The OC is Hackett. It's not like Rodgers is going to have an issue with running the plays the way he wants it run. But it's also something you didn't see in the Packers offenses. Last year when we had two plays from the Giants 2 yardline, you didn't see the OTs cutting the DEs on those quick passes. 

 

It's all kinda moot now, but after he gets hit on the first pass attempt, probably not a great idea to ask your 38 year old LT to come back to it right away. 

[CheezWizHed]

So we know the LT tried a cut-block on 2 of 4 snaps Rodgers played in... how many did they do for the game?  You typically cut-block when you are doing something quick - like a WR screen or a slant... perhaps it is just coincidence?  Hard to know the full game plan.  

Rodgers could've gotten hurt like he did on any other play call where he gets sacked.  It isn't like the cut-block call caused his injury.  It was an awkward sack that could've happened anytime.

[CheezWizHed]

New topic.  I see TE Austin Allen was released from the PS.  I'm pretty surprised by that.  After thinking he was going to be a decent option at development TE and being one of my last people predicted to be cut (mainly because of TE need), I'm surprised to see him off the PS now.  

Now I wonder if they give Michael Jordan jersey #23... (Yes, Jaire would protest)

[BrewerFan]

On 9/13/2023 at 10:39 AM, CheezWizHed said:

So we know the LT tried a cut-block on 2 of 4 snaps Rodgers played in... how many did they do for the game?  You typically cut-block when you are doing something quick - like a WR screen or a slant... perhaps it is just coincidence?  Hard to know the full game plan.  

Rodgers could've gotten hurt like he did on any other play call where he gets sacked.  It isn't like the cut-block call caused his injury.  It was an awkward sack that could've happened anytime.

That's obviously true, he could get hurt on any play, but you're trying to play to probabilities.

We do know that the cut block contributed to the injury in this particular case as Rodgers is SO well known for spinning out, making that DE just crashing down on him and making him miss while he goes off-script and they do the whole scramble drill. 

It was supposed to be a quick throw, as was the first one where he got hit, but if you're cutting there and they take away that quick screen/quick hitch that Rodgers loves SO much(and he's been WILDLY successful throwing  and putting a WRer one on one with a CB leading to a lot of 1st downs). 

 

You could obviously also say that having a 38 year old LT in Duane Brown, an ineffective LT last year and going into the year PLANNING on Max Mitchell and Duane Brown to be your starting tackles(with Becton then earning the job despite starting the preseason as a backup) was a giant miscalculation as well.

That's a larger discussion though. We're also talking about how this injury may lead to grass fields rather than turf fields and we know it's VERY likely the injury occurs on grass as well. In the injury where Rodgers got hurt, you can point to a specific reason why he was hit. Both plays the OTs cut, the ball didn't come out quickly and Rodgers was able to elude on pass rusher and then wasn't able to elude the other. 

 

[BrewerFan]

On 9/13/2023 at 11:13 AM, CheezWizHed said:

New topic.  I see TE Austin Allen was released from the PS.  I'm pretty surprised by that.  After thinking he was going to be a decent option at development TE and being one of my last people predicted to be cut (mainly because of TE need), I'm surprised to see him off the PS now.  

Now I wonder if they give Michael Jordan jersey #23... (Yes, Jaire would protest)

That was a really surprising move IMO as well. I thought Allen looked good. He moved well, and more importantly, we now have no depth and there were times when you had 3 TEs on the field with Deguara not being one of them as he's effectively a FB at this point.

6'8, 250, he seemed rather fluid. Yeah, I agree.

And I think it's pretty clear Jordan gets #45. That was his non-basketball number(and even his Basketball number for a few months). 

[BrewerFan]

The Packers restructured Nijman's deal to add 4 years and create 2.64M in salary cap space this year.

 

Really an odd move as they have enough money to get through the year(you'd think) with just regular PS elevations and in-season moves. 

Seems somewhat significant as they're now ~11M under the cap. Could they be doing this to create some space for an extension or a signing? Otherwise, Nijman is now not eligible for any draft pick compensation after the season. And while he was unlikely to net us a 3rd or 4th, Tonyan was close at his ~2.6M. So he ALMOST certainly would have been good enough to get us a draft pick in return. Even if it's the 30th or 32nd of the 32 awarded. 

[CheezWizHed]

I have a suspicion that we will be signing a FA or two this year (unlike past years) so maybe they don't expect to get any compensation anyway?

What FA safeties are out there? Grab the best one! or two!

[BrewerFan]

28 minutes ago, CheezWizHed said:

I have a suspicion that we will be signing a FA or two this year (unlike past years) so maybe they don't expect to get any compensation anyway?

What FA safeties are out there? Grab the best one! or two!

That idea never even dawned on me. I was still thinking we'd be in a...not rebuilding year, but a recovery year spending wise. But you'll have nearly 70M on the cap next year in Bakh and Clark that will be coming off in '25, so if you're coming off a good year with Love, that's certainly plausible. 

Kyle Dugger from the Pats is a FA(6'2 222). I'd really like that fit, but I don't ever really trust Pats FAs, particularly on defense.
Antonio Winfield? Love him, loved his Dad, that'd be a nice addition.
Chauncey Gardner-Johnson is a FA, but feels like he's more of a coverage safety and I'd just as soon move Douglas there. 
Jeremy Chinn from the Panthers pretty versatile.

Spotract has Budda Baker as a FA and I know he's not. Though '24 would be his final year and IF you're going to start building up again next year, that's a guy I'd target. Maybe our 2nd-2nd rd pick? Safeties are generally cheap, but Baker is a pretty big difference maker.

I also think Savage coming back is certainly on the table. If he can match his output from week 1 then safety becomes far less of a priority. 

Kamern Curl is another safety who's not on these lists who's a nice, big, Justin Simmons type Safety for the Commanders. I'd love him and think he'd be a good fit. 

 

Finally, it makes more sense to spend in Free Agency rather than early in the draft as it's a lot easier to sign a safety than a good OT or DL. 

Top 50 Free Agents

https://www.nfl.com/news/top-50-nfl-free-agents-in-2024-tee-higgins-headlines-deep-receiver-crop-pass-rus

All FA at Safety

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/safety/

[LouisEly]

With the trade deadline being relatively early in football (10/31, 4pm Eastern this year), they might be clearing cap space to be able to acquire someone at the deadline.  A player who is making, say, $10M this year might fit under the cap after week 8 on 10/31 if they only need to pay him $5.6M the rest of the way.

[OldHeidelberg]

Bakhtiari listed as questionable, I guess there was something to the article this offseason that questioned whether he would play on turf.