Packers 2025 offseason

[BrewerFan]

On 2/18/2025 at 12:22 PM, CheezWizHed said:

As I read more and more about Higgins, I think he should be our #1 target.  And I don't know why he wouldn't be realistic? I doubt Cincinnati tags him to be their #2 WR.  Perhaps he loves it there and signs a decent contract?  But other than staying, I think the Packers have to be as interesting any anyone else - young ascending QB, cap room to meet any offer, clear need for a #1 with a room full of young WRs. 

I read people (sports articles) say dumb things like, "we need a speed WR and he won't take the top off the defense".  I saw one article suggest we resign MVS instead (really???).  

Higgins will be a good outside blocker, a great chain mover (basically Doubs role right now).  Let Reed and Watson take the top off the defense... I'd prefer Love focus a bit more on keeping drives alive and less on gunning the ball downfield. 

I think that's exactly what they need at WR and what they should be looking at. Not MVS, but they have a well rounded WR core. Watson taking that extra safety with him was why the offense opened up so much more with him on the field. A lot more room for Doubs, Reed, Wicks and the TEs to work.

Obviously Higgins would be a great addition, but I'd prefer you put that money toward...Trey Smith or Ronnie Stanley(and I don't think we'll sign either).

[JosephC]

The free agent receiver that intrigues me is Darius Slayton.  He's been pretty much a 700 yard, 3 TD per season type player but he's been stuck with a junk quarterback since day one.  Next year will be his age 28 season.  Combine numbers back in the day, 6-1, 190 pounds, 32 3/4 inch arms, 10 inch hands, 4.40 40 time, 40.5 inch vertical, 11'3" broad jump, 4.15 20 yard shuttle, 7.00 3-cone.  So he's either a great athlete and a very mediocre football player which is what he's been so far, or a potentially good football player that has been held back by crappy quarterbacking.  He wouldn't be a priority, but worth giving some consideration.

My top 2 free agent targets would still be CB-Carlton Davis and DT-B.J. Hill.  The guy who I'd really like is C-Drew Dalman (this center draft class looks pretty bad), and he'd be the first free agent I would approach, but I think it would take 2 or 3 16-18 million dollar cap hits later in the contract and that is higher than I would go.  Davis and Hill should come with reasonable contracts and hopefully would provide good value for the money.  I am not nearly as optimistic on the cornerback group minus Alexander and Stokes as some...I think they need to add 2 CBs minimum to the group and getting 1 by free agency seems the way to go.  The Packers probably only need to add 1 DT this off-season, and Hill just seems like a solid player who could be had for a reasonable price.  Sign him, and I'd cross DT off the list of draft needs. 

[CheezWizHed]

11 hours ago, JosephC said:

The free agent receiver that intrigues me is Darius Slayton.  He's been pretty much a 700 yard, 3 TD per season type player but he's been stuck with a junk quarterback since day one.  Next year will be his age 28 season.  Combine numbers back in the day, 6-1, 190 pounds, 32 3/4 inch arms, 10 inch hands, 4.40 40 time, 40.5 inch vertical, 11'3" broad jump, 4.15 20 yard shuttle, 7.00 3-cone.  So he's either a great athlete and a very mediocre football player which is what he's been so far, or a potentially good football player that has been held back by crappy quarterbacking.  He wouldn't be a priority, but worth giving some consideration.

My top 2 free agent targets would still be CB-Carlton Davis and DT-B.J. Hill.  The guy who I'd really like is C-Drew Dalman (this center draft class looks pretty bad), and he'd be the first free agent I would approach, but I think it would take 2 or 3 16-18 million dollar cap hits later in the contract and that is higher than I would go.  Davis and Hill should come with reasonable contracts and hopefully would provide good value for the money.  I am not nearly as optimistic on the cornerback group minus Alexander and Stokes as some...I think they need to add 2 CBs minimum to the group and getting 1 by free agency seems the way to go.  The Packers probably only need to add 1 DT this off-season, and Hill just seems like a solid player who could be had for a reasonable price.  Sign him, and I'd cross DT off the list of draft needs. 

Center seems like the last place to go for in FA.  Not really the place where I want to spend the money though Dalman seems like a top guy.  I'd just prefer to spend the money at CB, DL, or WR. 

[BrewerFan]

15 hours ago, JosephC said:

My top 2 free agent targets would still be CB-Carlton Davis and DT-B.J. Hill.  The guy who I'd really like is C-Drew Dalman (this center draft class looks pretty bad)

I think the Center class looks bad because most of the guys who'll likely play Center from this class played OT in College. Mbow is a guy who could step in and be an immediate starter at center.

Zabel can play probably anywhere, but could also be a Center. Charles Grant is another guy who looks like an NFL Center, though...probably not someone you'd want to start year one. It's certainly not a great class, but I think there are more options there when you look at smaller, mobile OTs.

Dalman would be a great guy to give a 2/18M type deal, but the lack of guys who actually played Center in College or FAs could push his price up. I've seen some scouts really high on McLaughlin, the C from OSU. There's also the fact the Packers seemed to have a different opinion of Myers than most of us, so maybe he's brought back(though I think we'd be best served looking elsewhere).

 

WR is tough, but Slaton could be a guy who just needs a better fit.

BJ Hill is a really nice player who I would have thought was older. And again, if Calais Campbell is going to play for a few million dollars again next year, I'd like the Packers to bring him in. #1 graded DT vs the run by PFF and he'd have been by far our highest graded DL. Great locker room guy. Obviously not part of the future, but he just keeps playing well. 

[JosephC]

If the Packers are looking for an immediate possibility at center, Seth McLaughlin is likely out.  He tore his Achilles in November and the last thing I heard is the typical 1 year recovery time.  Maybe could play at the tail end of 2025, but pretty likely he will miss next season.

[LouisEly]

9 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

I've seen some scouts really high on McLaughlin, the C from OSU.

As am I.  He started for two years at Alabama before transferring to OSU.  Got hurt late in the season so he kind of fell off of radars, but he was a consensus first team All-American.  35 games, over 1000 pass block snaps and was credited with only one sack given up, five knockdowns, and 24 pressures.  Graduated in 2.5 years from Alabama with a 4.00 GPA, and between Alabama and OSU he went up against future NFL DL in practice every day.

[LouisEly]

8 minutes ago, JosephC said:

If the Packers are looking for an immediate possibility at center, Seth McLaughlin is likely out.

They don't really need one, as they have four guys on the roster who can play center - Jenkins, Tom, Rhyan, and Monk.  They have the luxury of drafting a developmental/injury rehab guy who they can wait a year on.

[BrewerFan]

32 minutes ago, JosephC said:

If the Packers are looking for an immediate possibility at center, Seth McLaughlin is likely out.  He tore his Achilles in November and the last thing I heard is the typical 1 year recovery time.  Maybe could play at the tail end of 2025, but pretty likely he will miss next season.

Ah....I didn't realize that. I guess I was getting his timeline and Simmons mixed up.

22 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

They don't really need one, as they have four guys on the roster who can play center - Jenkins, Tom, Rhyan, and Monk.  They have the luxury of drafting a developmental/injury rehab guy who they can wait a year on.

 

Tom and Jenkins can play there, but they leave behind massive holes. Tom more so than Jenkins, but you'd just be creative a massive hole at RT(or potentially LT as I think Tom ends up there).

I think putting Monk in that conversation is putting a lot on Monk. I think this OL needs to get better. They graded out much better it seems the 2nd half of the season, but I don't trust the OL to hold up against good DLs. So taking Tom leaves you vulnerable to the more athletic edge rushers on the outside. Rhyan doesn't really fit the scheme at at Center. He's a bigger, slower, more physical guard.

 

Hopefully Morgan can step up in his 2nd year and they can add another player via the draft or FA, but I'd be uncomfortable losing Myers and going into next year with the OL that finished the season(plus Morgan). I don't think that's the type of team that can hold up vs the Lions with Hutchinson, McNiel or as we saw, the Eagles.

[CheezWizHed]

I'm oddly warming to bringing back Stokes.  That is assuming a vet min contract or not much more.  

Assuming Jaire is out and a few of our backup CBs are FAs, there is room for a high upside CB that has been struggling the last couple of years.  Perhaps another year removed from his major injuries would also help him bounce back also. 

He can compete in TC with a draft pick or two, some UDFAs and perhaps another vet min CB to be on the depth chart. 

[CheezWizHed]

  

On 2/13/2025 at 12:19 PM, CheezWizHed said:

In general, I do think the Z-Smith player profile is one that would be nice to replicate.  Someone that can rush inside and outside.  On obvious passing downs, he can replace a DT and put a dedicated pass rusher (i.e. the too light against the run, lightning quick) on the outside.  

When we had Z-Smith, he was a good player himself, but also elevated others because you could move around and confuse the OL.  His versatility was great... too bad he wasn't a great teammate...

So I wonder if Dayo Odeyingbo might be that type of player to target?  Seems to be ascending these last four years in win rate and pressures (sacks have fluctuated).  He rushes from DE or DT... And one year younger than when we grabbed Z-Smith from Baltimore. 

[HarryDoyle]

Well, it looks like Gutey wanted to make the Packers the "Get off my lawn" team of the NFL with his comments to ban the Tush Push.

[CheezWizHed]

4 hours ago, HarryDoyle said:

Well, it looks like Gutey wanted to make the Packers the "Get off my lawn" team of the NFL with his comments to ban the Tush Push.

I'm still trying to remember when it became legal... It used to be illegal to push the ball carrier forward... You had to push on the defenders, not your teammates. Easy fix.

[mrn1ceguy]

10 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

I'm still trying to remember when it became legal... It used to be illegal to push the ball carrier forward... You had to push on the defenders, not your teammates. Easy fix.

Thats the explanation for this famous picture from the ice bowl.  Chuck Mercein (#30) had his hand up during the run, to show he was not aiding the runner.  I also remember Reggie Bush getting a penalty or maybe should have gotten a penalty when he was at USC and they were going for a national championship when he pushed Matt Leinart into the endzone. Google tells me they revised the penalty in 2005 to only be a penalty for pulling and carrying a runner, not pushing.  But a simple reversal of not allowing pushing would eliminate this, IMO, boring play and improve the game.

[SeaBass]

10 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

I'm still trying to remember when it became legal... It used to be illegal to push the ball carrier forward... You had to push on the defenders, not your teammates. Easy fix.

From what I understand it might still be illegal, the refs just don't call it. ESPN had a story on it a couple days ago which has since been updated once it became known that the Packers are the team that proposed banning it.

Mark Murphy apparently also did a Q&A on the Packers website and spoke about it saying:

Quote

"I am not a fan of this play. There is no skill involved and it is almost an automatic first down on plays of a yard or less. The series of plays with the Commanders jumping offsides in the NFC Championship Game to try to stop the play was ridiculous. ... I would like to see the league prohibit pushing or aiding the runner (QB) on this play," Murphy said. "There used to be a rule prohibiting this, but it is no longer enforced because I believe it was thought to be too hard for the officials to see. The play is bad for the game, and we should go back to prohibiting the push of the runner. This would bring back the traditional QB sneak. That worked pretty well for Bart Starr and the Packers in the Ice Bowl."

Troy Vincent also mentions that the Tush Push play has been something that has been discussed at least twice in previous seasons so it's not like the Packers proposal is coming out of the blue, this has been a rule that is being continually examined.

Personally I think it should be banned. But on a scale of 1 to 10 of things I'd be passionate about seeing happen it's pretty low, like a 3 or 4. If they change it great, if not it's not going to bother me too much.

[SeaBass]

1 minute ago, mrn1ceguy said:

Thats the explanation for this famous picture from the ice bowl.  Chuck Mercein (#30) had his hand up during the run, to show he was not aiding the runner.  I also remember Reggie Bush getting a penalty or maybe should have gotten a penalty when he was at USC and they were going for a national championship when he pushed Matt Leinart into the endzone. Google tells me they revised the penalty in 2005 to only be a penalty for pulling and carrying a runner, not pushing.  But a simple reversal of not allowing pushing would eliminate this, IMO, boring play and improve the game.

Players pushing teammates forward on the field of play happens in more instances than just these 4th down and 1 plays. WRs catching the ball and running upfield get pushed once a defender has stopped their momentum. RBs running traditional run plays also get help. Pretty much any time there's a bit of a scrum but the player is still fighting for yards teammates jump in to help push forward for a couple more yards.

So I'm not sure if the Packers proposal is only for the Tush Push or if it encompasses all of these instances. I admit I'm more in favor of keeping the helping of a teammate during a normal play and banning the 4th and 1 type play. I think a distinction can be made within the rules.

[CheezWizHed]

3 hours ago, SeaBass said:

Players pushing teammates forward on the field of play happens in more instances than just these 4th down and 1 plays. WRs catching the ball and running upfield get pushed once a defender has stopped their momentum. RBs running traditional run plays also get help. Pretty much any time there's a bit of a scrum but the player is still fighting for yards teammates jump in to help push forward for a couple more yards.

So I'm not sure if the Packers proposal is only for the Tush Push or if it encompasses all of these instances. I admit I'm more in favor of keeping the helping of a teammate during a normal play and banning the 4th and 1 type play. I think a distinction can be made within the rules.

Even this was supposed to be limited to your offensive players pushing the pile by pushing the defenders...not pushing the ball carrier.  

You could also look at the rules for ST where you can't have two defenders aiding (i.e. jumping off, pushing forward) another player.

[BrewerFan]

On 2/25/2025 at 11:58 AM, CheezWizHed said:

  

So I wonder if Dayo Odeyingbo might be that type of player to target?  Seems to be ascending these last four years in win rate and pressures (sacks have fluctuated).  He rushes from DE or DT... And one year younger than when we grabbed Z-Smith from Baltimore. 

You write for the Packers Wire? LOL...they just had a write up on him calling him an ascending player.

Projected salary 4/66M...so right in that Za'Darius Smith range. I'd be on board as long as the guarantees aren't too much.

Spending could get stupid this off-season with a lot of teams improving their cap situation and the Cap jumping up more than projected(though it pretty much always does outside Covid).

 

Gutey's comments were interesting as well. I'm paraphrasing, but he essentially said he doesn't like going into the draft with just 7 picks, that despite the draft being held in GB, he'd still consider moving back. When asked about trading for an edge, he said it'd have to be "the right edge," which...no kidding. I don't think he's just itching to trade away a 1st for Sam Hubbard.

[Joseph Zarr]

I am entirely ALL for Team Trade Back in 2025 if nobody falls to the Packers selection. Once again it seems the consensus is the true 1st Rd Grades fall off around 15. It would appear having as many picks as the Packers can gather in that 25-100 range would be a wise strategy yet again. Plus, it would be nauseatingly fun to hear the collective mass groans and boos at the Draft while I sheepishly grin. 

[BrewerFan]

1 hour ago, Joseph Zarr said:

I am entirely ALL for Team Trade Back in 2025 if nobody falls to the Packers selection. Once again it seems the consensus is the true 1st Rd Grades fall off around 15. It would appear having as many picks as the Packers can gather in that 25-100 range would be a wise strategy yet again. Plus, it would be nauseatingly fun to hear the collective mass groans and boos at the Draft while I sheepishly grin. 

Yeah, I love those Bears picks. Hopefully there is someone the Bears really want at 23. 39+41 would be great(probably a bit of an overpay).

I liked last years class a lot more...and even then Mitchell nearly fell to us(in hindsight, that would have been a time to trade up). I'd say at 40 as well with DeJean, but I think the Cooper we got is going to be a monster.

[HarryDoyle]

18 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

I'm still trying to remember when it became legal... It used to be illegal to push the ball carrier forward... You had to push on the defenders, not your teammates. Easy fix.

I have no problem with it at all. The object is to score after all, and you should be able to use any means necessary. It's similar to when a catch was still ruled a catch even though the receiver was pushed out of bounds if by the official's judgement the receiver would've got two feet in. The defender should have any means necessary to force an incompletion by pushing a receiver out of bounds and I'm glad that rule was changed. If the NFL outlaws the Tush Push it won't bother me at all, but I have no problem with it. If anything, you should only use the Tush Push on 4th and goal from the 1 yard line.

[SeaBass]

15 hours ago, HarryDoyle said:

I have no problem with it at all. The object is to score after all, and you should be able to use any means necessary. It's similar to when a catch was still ruled a catch even though the receiver was pushed out of bounds if by the official's judgement the receiver would've got two feet in. The defender should have any means necessary to force an incompletion by pushing a receiver out of bounds and I'm glad that rule was changed. If the NFL outlaws the Tush Push it won't bother me at all, but I have no problem with it. If anything, you should only use the Tush Push on 4th and goal from the 1 yard line.

I find it amusing how much Nick Sirianni is up in his feelings just because the NFL is considering banning the tush push. I really want a reporter to ask him, "Do you think your team would not have won a Super Bowl if you couldn't use that play?" Because whatever he replies he's trapped. Either your team is good enough to get along without that exploit or it isn't. So what is it Nicky?

[CheezWizHed]

19 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

You write for the Packers Wire? LOL...they just had a write up on him calling him an ascending player.

Projected salary 4/66M...so right in that Za'Darius Smith range. I'd be on board as long as the guarantees aren't too much.

Spending could get stupid this off-season with a lot of teams improving their cap situation and the Cap jumping up more than projected(though it pretty much always does outside Covid).

 

Gutey's comments were interesting as well. I'm paraphrasing, but he essentially said he doesn't like going into the draft with just 7 picks, that despite the draft being held in GB, he'd still consider moving back. When asked about trading for an edge, he said it'd have to be "the right edge," which...no kidding. I don't think he's just itching to trade away a 1st for Sam Hubbard.

No, but I do read their writeups and it prompted me to look into him.  😏

37 minutes ago, SeaBass said:

I find it amusing how much Nick Sirianni is up in his feelings just because the NFL is considering banning the tush push. I really want a reporter to ask him, "Do you think your team would not have won a Super Bowl if you couldn't use that play?" Because whatever he replies he's trapped. Either your team is good enough to get along without that exploit or it isn't. So what is it Nicky?

Frankly that is an easy answer.  If it were me, I'd say, "Of course my team is good enough to win the SB without the play.   But this play aligns really well to my team's strengths, so we obviously use it often and want to continue using it."  

I'd run for political office except I have ethics...😂

16 hours ago, HarryDoyle said:

I have no problem with it at all. The object is to score after all, and you should be able to use any means necessary. It's similar to when a catch was still ruled a catch even though the receiver was pushed out of bounds if by the official's judgement the receiver would've got two feet in. The defender should have any means necessary to force an incompletion by pushing a receiver out of bounds and I'm glad that rule was changed. If the NFL outlaws the Tush Push it won't bother me at all, but I have no problem with it. If anything, you should only use the Tush Push on 4th and goal from the 1 yard line.

The "official's judgement the receiver would've got two feet in" was stupid.  Football shouldn't be in the subjective hands of a ref. 

I'm not on a campaign to eliminate the play... I'm probably 60/40 in favor of getting rid of it.  There are plenty of rules that go against "by any means necessary" otherwise holding, tripping, etc.. would all be legal.  We have other rules to prevent people from assisting another, so why not here?  I suppose when the first DT gets injured because he has 4 people in front of him pushing into him (OL, QB + 2 tush pushing), then they will ban it. 

[SeaBass]

7 minutes ago, CheezWizHed said:

Frankly that is an easy answer.  If it were me, I'd say, "Of course my team is good enough to win the SB without the play.   But this play aligns really well to my team's strengths, so we obviously use it often and want to continue using it."  

I'd run for political office except I have ethics...😂

Even that would satisfy my goal, an admission that the play is not necessary for competition. The dude is legitimately offended that this even happened, he needs to get over himself and his ego.

As you've pointed out there is a question about player safety involved here and the tush push specifically does walk a line of potentially unnecessary risk. It's a dangerous sport so it is what it is but there are reasons to examine the rule even if they ultimately decide to let it ride.

[CheezWizHed]

8 hours ago, SeaBass said:

Even that would satisfy my goal, an admission that the play is not necessary for competition. The dude is legitimately offended that this even happened, he needs to get over himself and his ego.

Oh. I don't bother listening to coach's banter.  I don't find much value in it (even our own coaches).  

[DR28]

Seeing online that numerous people around the league believe we will end up trading for Metcalf and may already have a deal in place.