Packers 2023 Discussion Thread

[BrewerFan]

41 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

I mean pretty much the whole 2020 Packer draft class sucked. The 2021 class pretty much sucked. It's hard to say he's found much impact in the draft since Gary in 2019. So I don't think that Love is the only reason, and if it is - well, Gutekunst always had a lot of his reputation staked in Love, for better or worse. Many here have said that numerous times. 

If you trade up in the 1st round to draft your future QB to replace Aaron Rodgers and he spends 3 years in the system and he does not work out for you, that is an enormous reflection on your GM. And I'm not saying he hasn't worked out yet, we still don't know, but if he doesn't? Absolutely, it's a massive hit to Gutekunst's reputation and could cost him his job. I don't think we can pretend otherwise. 

His job isn't in jeopardy and if he did go out and spend a 1st on Maye or Williams, he's not going to be "punished" for that. They're spending significantly less money this year on the players on their team than anyone in the NFL after 3 straight years of winning 13 games trying to win an SB, they've completely turned over their roster, and Gutekunst isn't going anywhere while Murphy is here and that's through at least next year. I think the pretending would be a late 1st rd QB NOT being a franchise QB would mean he's fired.

 

In any event, the argument went from he holds onto bad players too long to an ENTIRELY different argument that IF this QB isn't good, we can't "pretend," won't get him fired. 

Two...entirely different issues, and I don't care to go further into the 2nd as it's pointless.  

[BrewerFan]

51 minutes ago, Sixtolezcano said:

No I was the one to have some patience with Rashan Gary. But you must of been disappointed when they got rid of Datone Jones, when you said he would be the second coming of Reggie White.

Josh Jackson, DB        3 seasons

Oren Burks, LB            4 seasons

Royce Newman, OL      2+ seasons and counting

 

NARRATIVE….lol

Yeah, I didn't say anything about Gary or Jones there bud and LouisEly cited several examples of players who WERE cut relatively quickly which...flat out disproves the claim he WON'T do that. Try and keep track of who you're talking to.

Now I'll just cut and paste the response that was coherent and made sense in response to your claim;

"Gutey hates to cut any of his higher draft picks and admit defeat no matter how evident it is that his pick is a failure."

You cited a STs ace, a solid CB who wasn't as good as projected, but unquestionably one of the best 53, and a 4th rd Guard who's a backup and in his 3rd year...

And you're still arguing this despite ample evidence to DIS-prove your point;

 

@LouisEly made this comment...and was right.

[BrewerFan]

On 11/3/2023 at 4:05 PM, CheezWizHed said:

You don't think Gute will draft a 1st round QB while already having one? 

He has made some comments about Love recently, so I'm guessing he would be open to it.  Frankly, if we had one of the top 2 picks (and considering how bad we would be to fall that far), I'd hope he'd run to the podium to draft one of them.

I have absolutely zero doubt he'd pass on one of these two QBs if they had as high of a grade on him as seemingly EVERYONE else does. What I hope he doesn't do is draft a guy like JJ McCarthy just to get another QB. 

If they think he's a legit QB, fine. I'd prefer they just build around Love(at least for one more year). It's nearly impossible to know what Love is with what we have at the moment. I'm kinda at that point where I can't actually root for them to lose, but...I'm not all that invested in them winning as it's counterproductive long-term, but it seems impossible(even before yesterday) to move below AZ, Car and Chicago. I think someone already pointed out, and the issue was already debated, but the Packers just aren't bad enough to catch up in the tankathon with the Panthers, Cards, and Bears. I'll guess we actually end up picking ~12th or so. 

 

 

[nate82]

19 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

I'm not all that invested in them winning as it's counterproductive long-term, but it seems impossible(even before yesterday) to move below AZ, Car and Chicago. I think someone already pointed out, and the issue was already debated, but the Packers just aren't bad enough to catch up in the tankathon with the Panthers, Cards, and Bears. I'll guess we actually end up picking ~12th or so.

Wait I thought it was impossible to tell how a season will go?  Not only do the Packers have to bypass the Bears, Cardinals and Panthers.  They also have to bypass the Patriots and Giants.  Far too many teams to bypass for the Packers and they just don't suck as much as those teams do.  The Packers are stuck in the 6-11 to 8-9 win team area.  Which puts them in the 5-12 pick range. 

It is going to be extremely hard to get into the top three picks for the Packers.  Their schedule is not favorable for them to get into that range.  The Bears actually have about the same schedule as the Packers and they maybe have 1 or 2 wins left in them.  I said it before the Packers had about 4 wins in them yet.  They got one of the wins I was thinking they would get against the Rams without their starting QB.  The next 4 are probably loses for the Packers as these are all playoff teams bu then they have the Giants in Week 14, Panthers in Week 16 and the Bears in Week 18.  There is also a maybe in there against the Buccaneers in Week 15.  There are your 3 more wins to get what I predicted for the Packers even if they lose one of the games against the Giants, Panthers and Bears they have another maybe in the Buccaneers.  That would put the Packers at 6-11 or 7-10 and probably puts them at the 8-10 draft pick range.  The Panthers and Cardinals look like they are going to be 1-2 with the Patriots probably being the #3 pick team. 

The Patriots look like they have 3 winnable games.  Only because it is hard to predict how a team will do playing over seas.  The Colts could come out flat but even then they probably beat the Patriots.  The Patriots only have two winnable games in the Giants and Broncos, though they did beat the Bills in week 7. 

The Cardinals even with Murray coming back are a dumpster fire.  The Texans and Bears games are probably their only winnable games on their schedule.  I wouldn't be surprised if they lose out or win three games.  Even if they win three games that is a 4-13 season which I don't believe the Packers have any realistic chance in getting to. 

The most likely scenario would be the Packers finishing 6-11 on the season and getting the 7th or 8th pick in the draft.  If the Packers want to trade up into the top 2 picks to get a QB they will need to either deal with the Bears, Patriots or Cardinals.  All three of those teams could be looking at drafting a QB in the 1-3 slots.  I don't think you could convince either of those three teams to trade their picks for anything short than a kings ransom.  I am talking multiple first, second and third round picks.  Probably at a minimum two first round picks, one second and two third round picks. 

[Oxy]

There are more than 2 QBs in this draft....quite a few more, actually, so I wouldn't advocate for trading up to get Williams or Maye.

[BrewerFan]

7 minutes ago, nate82 said:

Wait I thought it was impossible to tell how a season will go?

Yeah. And it is. I'm not saying the Cards have "one winnable game left." You are. I said it was unlikely the Packers could end up with a top 2 pick(BEFORE playing the Rams without their starting QB) and spelled out pretty clearly what I didn't agree with.

Quote

 

Again, Cards are getting their QB back, and...you've watched the NFL long enough to know you cannot POSSIBLY script this out with 9 weeks left in the season. 

Again, the Cards could VERY reasonably beat the Browns, Falcons, Texans, Rams, the Seahawks the last week of the season.

Hell, they could beat the 49ers who have lost 3 straight to the Browns, Vikings, and Bengals. 

I'm not predicting the Packers end up with the 1st or 2nd pick...they could just as easily end up with the 12th, but your rationale in how you get there is deeply flawed claiming the Cards only have one possible win left...and trying to project the last half of the season. We just saw the Texans win the last game of the year last year. 

You could easily look at the Packers' schedule and say they've only got 1 or maybe 2 wins left. Given the huge dropoff in Love's play since their 2 wins in the first 3 weeks(mostly due to the OL getting hurt/struggling and the WRers being terrible). 

There is WAY too much season to go and WAY too many massive upsets nearly every week to be this confident about the Bears and Cardinals not winning more than 1-2 more games left. 

 

 

Show me a contradiction. I don't THINK the Packers finish top 2(again, before their win yesterday) but I think your rationale is flawed. 

How about the Bears losing by ONE score to the Saints despite 5 additional turnovers?

Is this really the hill we're dying on? Me saying it's illogical to say that 8 games into the season you can't say the Cards and Bears have just one more win?

Hmmkay...

[BrewerFan]

16 minutes ago, Oxy said:

There are more than 2 QBs in this draft....quite a few more, actually, so I wouldn't advocate for trading up to get Williams or Maye.

Yeah... there are probably 50 draft-eligible QBs. They're obviously not all created the same.

If you're going to replace Love at this point, without seeing him play with receivers who have more than 1 season under their belt, an OL that's been bad, and one of the worst running games, you need to be damn sure the guy you're using a 1st rd pick on is at least an upgrade on what you have. I suppose they may end up believing that's Ewers or McCarthy, but the consensus is there are two elite QBs and then a huge drop-off. 

If we're just drafting a QB and hoping, then we end up in a cycle like the Bears. 

 

[Oxy]

2 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

Yeah... there are probably 50 draft-eligible QBs. They're obviously not all created the same.

If you're going to replace Love at this point, without seeing him play with receivers who have more than 1 season under their belt, an OL that's been bad, and one of the worst running games, you need to be damn sure the guy you're using a 1st rd pick on is at least an upgrade on what you have. I suppose they may end up believing that's Ewers or McCarthy, but the consensus is there are two elite QBs and then a huge drop-off. 

If we're just drafting a QB and hoping, then we end up in a cycle like the Bears. 

 

Well, to name names, I like Penix Nix and Sanders more than Mccarthy or Ewers.

[nate82]

Just now, BrewerFan said:

Yeah. And it is. I'm not saying the Cards have "one winnable game left." You are. I said it was unlikely the Packers could end up with a top 2 pick(BEFORE playing the Rams without their starting QB) and spelled out pretty clearly what I didn't agree with.

 

Show me a contradiction. I don't THINK the Packers finish top 2(again, before their win yesterday) but I think your rationale is flawed. 

How about the Bears losing by ONE score to the Saints despite 5 additional turnovers?

Is this really the hill we're dying on? Me saying it's illogical to say that 8 games into the season you can't say the Cards and Bears have just one more win?

Hmmkay...

If you look at their schedules they don't have many winnable games left.  I am also not saying they will only win one or two games.  It is just on their schedule you can only mark one or two games as winnable for each team comparing the talent levels of each team.  Going by the odds and how bad these teams have played I am fairly confident that the Cardinals, Bears, Patriots and Panthers may only win 2-3 more games this year. 

The Saints barely winning had more to do with the Saints than the Bears.  That should have been absolute blowout but wasn't.  The Saints still won and the Bears still looked awful like their record suggests they are.  The Packers just don't have a chance to draft in the top 3 as one poster thought they had. 

 

[nate82]

Just now, Oxy said:

Well, to name names, I like Penix Nix and Sanders more than Mccarthy or Ewers.

Both of those are probably round 2 QB's and Sanders maybe round 3.  I think Sanders returns for his senior year as he needs to show another year of progress if he wants to get out of the 2nd or 3rd round area.

[BrewerFan]

18 minutes ago, Oxy said:

Well, to name names, I like Penix Nix and Sanders more than Mccarthy or Ewers.

Penix Jr seems like a backup to me. If we're taking a QB who's already got limited tools...everything had really better hit.

McCarthy seems like the consensus #3 and a top ~20 prospect on just about every site, but he's I haven't really watched him enough to form a very strong opinion. 

Sanders looks like he could be interesting, but I am curious if he wasn't Deions son, if he wouldn't be rated a bit lower? 

 

IMO, at this time, having not watched any All-22(it's virtually impossible to get a good feel for a QB without all-22) two guys are as close to locks as you can be in Maye and Williams.

There's a guy in McCarthy who people are high on, Sanders who looks like he's got ALL the possible tools you could want, but just one year of FBS experience...and then Nix who was very unimpressive in the SEC and Ewers who again, I haven't watched. 

I don't know that any of those guys are better prospects than Levis was last year and I think you're worse off drafting a QB you're not confident in, then trying yourself to him for 2-3 years rather than just foregoing QB altogether, drafting around the QB and then targeting one next year when Allar looks like another really good prospect. 

But sure, if they're really high on Sanders or fine. The only one I really don't want is Penix. He's just too similar to a Teddy Bridgewater to me. Limited arm strength, limited athletic ability (good athlete, not great). I think he'd thrive in a place like Minnesota, but in GB...I want the bigger tools and then try and develop a QB. Which is why I've also not given up on Love. 

He's just so frustrating as he looks like he's aiming the ball too often instead of just letting it go as he was earlier in the year. 

[BrewerFan]

31 minutes ago, nate82 said:

If you look at their schedules they don't have many winnable games left.  I am also not saying they will only win one or two games.  It is just on their schedule you can only mark one or two games as winnable for each team comparing the talent levels of each team.  Going by the odds and how bad these teams have played I am fairly confident that the Cardinals, Bears, Patriots and Panthers may only win 2-3 more games this year. 

The Saints barely winning had more to do with the Saints than the Bears.  That should have been absolute blowout but wasn't.  The Saints still won and the Bears still looked awful like their record suggests they are.  The Packers just don't have a chance to draft in the top 3 as one poster thought they had. 

 

A blowout by WHO? The Bears should have blown the Saints out.

But whatever, that's my point. The NFL is too close and even the bad teams are more than capable of beating the best teams. The Cards have actually been in several games this year and could easily have a better record...and with Murray coming back, I wouldn't be surprised to see them run off a few wins.

The Panthers are the worst team, but even they have a rookie QB and it wouldn't surprise me to see him get hot later in the year and start to win. They have 2 games that they're big underdogs in.

Again, I'm not saying the Packers end up in the top 2, but...the margin is so slim, Carolina could beat us, Chicago, TB, ATL, NO, Tenn. The only BIG upsets would be the Jaguars and the Cowboys. Meanwhile, we just lost to the Broncos and the Raiders.

The draft order is going to shuffle quite a bit in the next 10 weeks. 

[BrewerFan]

56 minutes ago, nate82 said:

Both of those are probably round 2 QB's and Sanders maybe round 3.  I think Sanders returns for his senior year as he needs to show another year of progress if he wants to get out of the 2nd or 3rd round area.

If you're lacking arm strength, It's hard to see you going in the 1st rd. Penix, Ewers have average arms. Sanders arm strength and mobility put him as a late 1st if he comes out this year I think, another year and he could be 1-2 to Allar from PSU. McCarthy may also go back for that matter. It's possible there are only 2 QBs who have 1st rd-grade this year.

Get the LT of the future, if Love's still not the guy, go get Allar, Sanders or whoever comes out of nowhere a year from now. 

[Sixtolezcano]

 

Two...entirely different issues, and I don't care to go further into the 2nd as it's pointless.  
 

Thank goodness, it would be great if you would continue to use this rule on all of your posts.

Thank 

Quote

 

Two...entirely different issues, and I don't care to go further into the 2nd as it's pointless.  

 

 

[CheezWizHed]

Ok, please stop with the personal shots.  Debate about the issues all you like.  But taking shots about other's opinions can stop now. 

[HarveysWBs]

Saw a good point brought up at Acme Packing Company earlier today.  The Packers have the youngest team in the NFL not just this year, but in the last five years, with an average age of their roster right around 25 years old.

The Chiefs, who are also one of the youngest teams in the league, average 25.5 years old.

Assuming that for just about every team in the league, most of the back two thirds of the roster (the players that don't start) are probably always young guys there to be warm bodies, that would mean that your primary difference in average age from team to team is seen in the starting units.

To put that into perspective, if the Packers were to have the same average age as the Chiefs, they would be swapping out four or five of the starters who are rookies or second year players for experienced, second-contract veteran starters.  And in the case of the Packers, with our defense a much more veteran unit than the offense, all of those players would likely be on the offensive side of the ball.

My analysis:  Yeah, Love needs to fix his accuracy and his footwork.  Yeah, MLF could be a little better at calling plays for the guys he has and not the guys he wants to have.  But MLF is losing his mind on the sideline every game as our young team leads the league in penalties (60 total, tied with Dallas through 8 games, and Chicago and KC who have both played 9 games) and we have a bunch of receivers who can't remember their assignments.  A play caller can't get into his bag during drives littered with 2nd and 15 or 3rd and 22, and Love can never develop a rhythm and sees ghosts from defensive fronts that are constantly in pass rush mode.  The fact that MLF and Love aren't physically assaulting these young players several times a game speaks volumes to their self-control.  I don't entirely absolve either one of them, but I'm prone to be a bit more forgiving of their in-game performances in light of this.

As I see it, this is the result of two factors, both initiated by Gutekunst, and only one of them is really a fault.  First and most defensibly, you have to accept a version of this when we play the cap stretch game with guys like Rodgers and Bakhtiari, both of whom no longer contribute to our team's success on the field.  The bill comes due, and we're paying it plus interest.  But second and most critically, this problem is exacerbated by several recent drafts that have not restocked the pantry, and we desperately needed them to, especially at pass catcher and O-line.  Gute thought he could build those rooms on the cheap, and when Bakh's knee disintegrated and Adams told him to pound sand, we've been in a world of hurt.  That's on the GM.  You put a Deebo Samuel and a Tee Higgins (just to throw out a couple guys we could have drafted) plus one more dependable tackle on this team, and I'm not saying all our scoring problems go away, but we're at least 75% of the way there.  And we'd have a much clearer picture of what Jordan Love actually is by this point, to boot.  That's an alternate timeline I wish I was living in.

[MrTPlush]

16 hours ago, HarveysWBs said:

 The fact that MLF and Love aren't physically assaulting these young players several times a game speaks volumes to their self-control.

Love probably has tried. His punches were probably just 15 yards short of hitting the mark though.

[HarveysWBs]

2 hours ago, MrTPlush said:

Love probably has tried. His punches were probably just 15 yards short of hitting the mark though.

[Underachiever]

The "youngest team in the league" excuse is weak, especially when you are the youngest, or among the youngest, every year. At that point it's a feature and not a bug.

Calipari likes to moan that his UK teams are full of freshmen who make mistakes. 

[adambr2]

I actually felt more optimistic after today's game than I have anytime recently. 

As of right now, got the 8th, 40th, and 44th pick in the draft. That's some nice ammo. Plus the two 3rds. 

I'd love Brock Bowers in the 1st, but with the investment in Musgrave, an OT like Joe Alt is the smart pick if available. The backfield needs to be rebuilt, so I'd like to grab a RB with one of the 2nds. Maybe Treveon Henderson and a safety in the 2nd? Tyler Nubin?

I don't really feel that we need to draft a WR. With some ease on the cap situation, would a mini splash move like Mike Evans make sense? It'd be great to have a veteran for Love in the WR room, and that would complement the young corps of Reed, Doubs, Watson, Musgrave and Wicks quite well. 

With the 3rds, I'm fine with going BPA -- corner, either line, etc. I think they'll end up with an extra 4th from losing Lazard. 

A small free agent deal for someone like Gus Edwards or Zach Moss would be a fine complement to Henderson. 

Get someone else to run the defense and if you can get some nice strides from guys like Wyatt and Van Ness, they could turn things around fairly quickly. 

[BrewerFan]

On 11/10/2023 at 10:11 AM, Underachiever said:

The "youngest team in the league" excuse is weak, especially when you are the youngest, or among the youngest, every year. At that point it's a feature and not a bug.

Calipari likes to moan that his UK teams are full of freshmen who make mistakes. 

Yeah, but we're not the youngest or among the youngest every year. Particularly among offensive personnel where continuity is the most important. 

We're younger on offense than...I can ever remember this team being. 2 players on our 3 deep who are not on rookie deals. Aaron Jones and Jenkins(year 1 of his extension). 

That's absolutely a bug and NOT a feature. 

[BrewerFan]

31 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

I actually felt more optimistic after today's game than I have anytime recently. 

As of right now, got the 8th, 40th, and 44th pick in the draft. That's some nice ammo. Plus the two 3rds. 

I'd love Brock Bowers in the 1st, but with the investment in Musgrave, an OT like Joe Alt is the smart pick if available. The backfield needs to be rebuilt, so I'd like to grab a RB with one of the 2nds. Maybe Treveon Henderson and a safety in the 2nd? Tyler Nubin?

I don't really feel that we need to draft a WR. With some ease on the cap situation, would a mini splash move like Mike Evans make sense? It'd be great to have a veteran for Love in the WR room, and that would complement the young corps of Reed, Doubs, Watson, Musgrave and Wicks quite well. 

With the 3rds, I'm fine with going BPA -- corner, either line, etc. I think they'll end up with an extra 4th from losing Lazard. 

A small free agent deal for someone like Gus Edwards or Zach Moss would be a fine complement to Henderson. 

Get someone else to run the defense and if you can get some nice strides from guys like Wyatt and Van Ness, they could turn things around fairly quickly. 

I believe we're 6/40 and 48 after the weekend for what it's worth. That win vs the Rams killed us! Only half kidding.

I agree...mostly. You can see the talent on this team, I KNOW Jordan Love has the physical talent to be an All Pro. I also know Trey Lance does, so that's just one component. That throw to Watson that was picked, didn't HATE that. The last play...what in the hell are the WRers doing. Reed was actually breaking for the pylon and got free just as Love is letting it go, but what's the move there? Watson crosses in front of the DBs face? 

Still, saw some big time throws, some drops, some misses.

As for the draft-

I could not be more on board with Alt.

I've watched almost every ND game this year and Alt reminds me of Tyron Smith. He just moves so effortlessly in both pass pro and run blocking. He's pretty nasty and he's faced a few guys who are projected to go high in the draft and he completely stones them. I actually think their RT will be a star in the NFL as well.

Henderson and Nubin are nice players, but I don't think one OL is enough. Not with JRJ and Yosh both set to be FAs and...I'd guess both get 7-8M AAV. The thing that stands out watching someone like Mike Wahle or Kurt Benkert go through the All-22 breakdown or just watching it...how often we're just sooo close to a big play, but there's one mistake. 

I don't disagree with your analysis of needs, but I think rather than just going OT, S, RB, we should focus our attention on the OL and put off the other needs as they're easier to fill. Go all in on the OL, give Love one more year(a vet wide receiver makes a lot of sense...Evans is probably gonna cost 20M a year or more, so not sure about him, BUT Van Jefferson from the Rams, someone who's spent time in this system, wouldn't take a lot of snaps, but would be a very steady vet, I'd be all on board with that or Curtis Samuel, a Deebo type RB/WRer hybrid almost), but SOME vet absolutely makes sense...and this is probably naive, but man, I'd LOVE to get Donald Driver on this teams staff to work with the WRers. I don't know if he's interested in coaching, but...that'd be great to see all around move.

 

But what I'd do(for the 20th time) is use the 1st and 2nd rds on the OL. Just the type of depth that's available, that's rare. IF you think Mims is a Pro-Bowl RT or in this hypothetical, Fuaga fell to #22 and I could take 2 2nds to move up after adding a 2nd moving down one spot),..either way, take your 2nd rd picks and move back up for another OT and your set.

Blake Corum, the RB from Kentucky, Davis, Brooks from UT, lots of really good, versatile backs on day 3 or late on day 2. Blake Watson is a guy who's not as agile as Antonio Gibson, but has a similar skill set. I was a fan of Gibson when he came out...but figured there's no way we'd draft a back that high(we got Dillon). 

I'll also add we don't need one guy who come in and wears down the defense. Maybe Braelon Allen is there in the 4th and that's a steal, but I'd rather have 3 guys with great vision, and quickness and who run that outside zone well than one smaller back and then the old "change of pace."

 

Just using the NFL mock draft simulator, this is what I'd love;

It's just a silly little mock. Alt and Fashanu were on the board, the Rams moved up and added a 2nd, I traded down from that...all that is a bit beside the point.

This gives you a Joe Thomas-like LT, a mauling and vastly underrated RT(who could play LT). Frees Tom up to play C. 
Alt+Fuaga is a dream. Not as sexy as Harrison Jr, but...every big as effective.

Corley is a RB who plays WRer. We could use him like SF uses Deebo. 
Williams is a 6'5 220LB safety who and covers ground(a bit redundant with Hicks).

Mondon and Bell are two guys who are just ideal fits. Bell replaces Degura and is what we hoped he'd be. He's a 6'3 Delanie Walker-type H-Back. Not the blocker, but he's a willing blocker. 
Mondon is a 5 star recruit who filled in for Walker and jumps off the screen when you watch UGAs defense. Maybe use him as a 3rd LBer for a year before you move offf Campbell. He'd be a STs ace(I think he'll end up a 2nd after running in the 4.4-4.5 range at 6'3 230, but as of now, he's a mid 4th. 

Corum reminds me of Jones. He's had a torn ACL and he's gotten beaten up, but he's a really good back. 

 

----BUT the takeaway is get two OTs first. I get we(fans) generally don't like trading up, but I think it's worth it in this case. 

After the first two picks, you could argue for 50 guys and these rankings are going to shuffle dramatically. But if you can really fix 3 OL spots for the next decade, do it. Next year the WRers grow a bit, you assume the chemistry improves. Etiher Love makes a big jump...or he doesn't. If he doesn't, you go up and get Drew Allar when the draft is in Lambeau in '25. If he does improve, then you should be competitive by then. 

[adambr2]

I would love Corum at 116 if he were available.

RB is always cheap in free agency, so it seems like the perfect draft to take one rookie and complement him with a vet in FA.

I think Evans would be well worth 20M a year at least for 3 years or so. He's so reliable -- I don't think his body of work gets the recognition that it should. 

Failing that, I'm pretty much out on Van Jefferson. He's had opportunity after opportunity in LA and just hasn't ever shown any consistency.

Curtis Samuel is a guy I've always liked, though. He's sneakily underrated, and has always managed to maintain a pretty good target share in offenses with flashier targets. Durability is a bit of a concern. 

[LouisEly]

On 11/10/2023 at 10:11 AM, Underachiever said:

The "youngest team in the league" excuse is weak, especially when you are the youngest, or among the youngest, every year. At that point it's a feature and not a bug.

Calipari likes to moan that his UK teams are full of freshmen who make mistakes. 

The Packers were the 12th oldest team in the league last year.  Rodgers, Marcedes Lewis, Cobb, Bakhtiari, Watkins, Jones, Lazard, Jenkins, plus Crosby, Jarran Reed, Campbell, Preston Smith, Amos.  17th oldest in 2021.

That's roster age.  Field age is another.  When the veterans are on IR (Bakhtiari), the field age is even younger.

[Underachiever]

13 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

The Packers were the 12th oldest team in the league last year.  Rodgers, Marcedes Lewis, Cobb, Bakhtiari, Watkins, Jones, Lazard, Jenkins, plus Crosby, Jarran Reed, Campbell, Preston Smith, Amos.  17th oldest in 2021.

That's roster age.  Field age is another.  When the veterans are on IR (Bakhtiari), the field age is even younger.

Yes, I was trying to dig into this, since I had believed the "youngest team" thing for a while. Is it roster age? I saw something that weighted it by snaps played. I don't have an answer.