Packers 2025 offseason

[BrewerFan]

On 2/28/2025 at 1:33 PM, DR28 said:

Stuff is all over the place with this now.... Give up the cost to get Metcalf, we'd just draft a pass rusher that flames out like Van Ness anyway.

You ever think we...maybe call these guys a bust a biit too quickly?

LVN seems to be progressing similar to Gary and everyone said Gary was a bust. He's a 23 year old DE.

Not saying he's a superstar, but I wouldn't say he's flamed out," just yet.

[OldHeidelberg]

5 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

You ever think we...maybe call these guys a bust a biit too quickly?

LVN seems to be progressing similar to Gary and everyone said Gary was a bust. He's a 23 year old DE.

Not saying he's a superstar, but I wouldn't say he's flamed out," just yet.

He stays on the field and he his speed jumps out at you when he runs plays down from the backside. The upside is still there but Gary was rushing the passer way better his first couple of years. LVN needs to develop a pass rush move and soon.

[OldHeidelberg]

13 hours ago, HarryDoyle said:

Reports are that the Niners are trading Deebo Samuel to Washington for a fifth-round pick. If that's the case, Gute would be a fool to give up the package Seattle is asking for.

There just isn't a ton of trade value in the NLF for high paid players who are not blue chippers. Agreed, no way we should give up a first for DK. 

[BrewerFan]

1 minute ago, OldHeidelberg said:

He stays on the field and he his speed jumps out at you when he runs plays down from the backside. The upside is still there but Gary was rushing the passer way better his first couple of years. LVN needs to develop a pass rush move and soon.

Gary was and is a more talented pass rusher...even though he had more limited pass rush repertoire than you'd like. He's developed. I don't think LVN can be the type of pass rusher Gary is. Gary was really looking like a superstar for a while. Not always getting the sacks but getting to the QB.

LVN is pretty much just a bull rusher and then he switches it up with a speed rush and he can't really bend well enough to rely on that. He has to get better with his hands. BUT...he plays hard and he's really good vs the run.

 

I agree though, he's definitely not where Gary was as a pass rusher and he's just not as talented, but his all around game...if he has another year where he's not making any real impact, I'll agree he's flamed out.

 

One guy who...we'll never draft, but we should consider is that guy from Michigan. Josaiah Stewart. He's 6'1 245, so you know it's a long shot, but he is explosive and can win right now with his speed.

I definitely wouldn't be mad at another edge just because they're so important and rotating them and keeping them fresh is huge for them.

[BrewerFan]

7 minutes ago, OldHeidelberg said:

There just isn't a ton of trade value in the NLF for high paid players who are not blue chippers. Agreed, no way we should give up a first for DK. 

Yeah, teams value those draft picks so much...which I get, you have to build out your team and you can't trade for a bunch of guys who'll make 20-30M a year, but so many Pro-Bowlers end up getting traded for mid or late round picks. I'm sure in retrospect it makes sense to give up a 1st for more players, but that 5 years of cheap team control...it takes a special player to give up one or more of those(like we tried to with 27 year old Khalil Mack but the Raiders thought the Bears picks would be higher).

The two that sucked the worst for the Packers was losing Randy Moss and then Tony Gonzalez. Something happened with Gonzalez where I thought the Chiefs agreed to trading him for a 3rd and then backed out at the last minute.

 

-They actually were asking for a 3rd all week before the deadline, the Packers finally agreed and then KC, back when they were poorly ran changed it to a 2nd. TonyG thought he was a Packer, they had the Paperwork filled out...and we missed out on 5 years of a pretty dominant TE.

I remember one game, NE vs ATL and Tony G was the guy Belichick was determined to take away in the red-zone and they had three guys on him. Just following him around down there.

Tight End Tony Gonzalez Nearly Traded to Packers in 2008

[bigred]

On 2/28/2025 at 10:54 AM, OldSchoolSnapper said:

I wanted Metcalf right out of the draft. He is an animal. It is going to be pretty funny if that happens, handing Love that kind of physical freak that Rodgers probably would have burned down his house for.

I won't hold my breath though. I am sure the next report coming out is about how that report is completely made up.

Exactly. I ran across this article today. I laughed out loud after reading the part about how "media" reports during the offseason usually aren't very conflicting. Lol that can't be further from the truth. 

https://dairylandexpress.com/packers-dk-metcalf-trade-rumors-take-unexpected-turn-01jn9rbphe9v

Now watch, they'll end up trading for him. HA! 

[bigred]

On 2/28/2025 at 12:16 PM, OldSchoolSnapper said:

If Metcalf is getting a 1st and a promising player times have really changed. There was a time players like that got traded for 4ths.

Doubs is better than Wicks but I'd rather keep Wicks with the concussions and possible malcontent stuff. I can't see the Packers agreeing to a trade like that. He's under contract for only this season. I have seen "high pick" but I haven't seen that it's 23. I can't believe it is.

Samuel was traded for a 5th rd pick. The Seahawks won't get anywhere near a 1st for Metcalf. 

[bigred]

On 2/26/2025 at 4:11 PM, 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 disagree. It's football, not rugby. 

[LouisEly]

10 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

they had the Paperwork filled out...and we missed out on 5 years of a pretty dominant TE.

But instead of Gonzalez for either that 2009 3rd or 2nd, they got ten years of William Clay Matthews III.

[bigred]

I think the main reason there's so many conflicting reports on about Packers "trade rumors" is because they've always been very good at keeping any plans they have, behind closed doors, and making sure they don't leak out. All that leaves the media then, is pure speculation that usually ends up running wild. 

[Joseph Zarr]

Seems like an overpay for McDuffie but I am sure the Packers like his dependability and see him as an improving player who fills a need in the middle of their defense. He is available. Dependable. Plays downhill. They have familiarity. That's a Top 40 contract as of today, however, at his position.

[JosephC]

McDuffie's deal may be in the top 40 for linebackers, but still will only account for about 1.5% of the team's cap.  His coverage grades are bad, but the Packers probably only see him as a run-down player moving forward.  Last year the snap counts on defense were Walker = 68.6%, McDuffie = 64.19%, Wilson = 51.24%, Cooper = 45.09%, Hopper = 1.65%.  Plan moving forward is likely to have McDuffie's amount of snaps go to Cooper, McDuffie ends up with Wilson's snaps and Hopper can fill the void left by Wilson.  If Hopper develops, he jumps into McDuffie's spot and then McDuffie is a cut candidate next off-season.  McDuffie also playing on special teams likely played a role in the Packers bringing him back.

I think it was in the Packer's best interest to bring back either McDuffie or Wilson, because if they lost both they would be down to just Walker, Cooper and Hopper with Hopper barely having seen the field on defense last year.  They still need to add one linebacker and will likely do that in the later rounds of the draft, although some could very reasonably argue they should take one earlier since Walker is a free agent after this season.

[CheezWizHed]

Kind of surprising, but $4M/season isn't big either.  I assumed they'd bring back Wilson on a vet minimum deal again (and maybe they will?) instead of McD.  But continuity and a strong "floor" for the LB group is good too. 

[Joseph Zarr]

20 minutes ago, JosephC said:

McDuffie's deal may be in the top 40 for linebackers, but still will only account for about 1.5% of the team's cap.  His coverage grades are bad, but the Packers probably only see him as a run-down player moving forward.  Last year the snap counts on defense were Walker = 68.6%, McDuffie = 64.19%, Wilson = 51.24%, Cooper = 45.09%, Hopper = 1.65%.  Plan moving forward is likely to have McDuffie's amount of snaps go to Cooper, McDuffie ends up with Wilson's snaps and Hopper can fill the void left by Wilson.  If Hopper develops, he jumps into McDuffie's spot and then McDuffie is a cut candidate next off-season.  McDuffie also playing on special teams likely played a role in the Packers bringing him back.

I think it was in the Packer's best interest to bring back either McDuffie or Wilson, because if they lost both they would be down to just Walker, Cooper and Hopper with Hopper barely having seen the field on defense last year.  They still need to add one linebacker and will likely do that in the later rounds of the draft, although some could very reasonably argue they should take one earlier since Walker is a free agent after this season.

Last I remember hearing the Packers and Walker's Agent(s) were talking new deal? Maybe I am misremembering.

[LouisEly]

Walker isn't a FA - he was a 1st round pick so they have the 5th year option.  It's at $14.6M.

He played a lot better the second half of the season, and really the whole year better than last year.  His strengths are sideline-to-sideline and pass coverage where he can use his athleticism; the games where he graded out well were games where he had to make plays outside the tackles, which he does really well.  Being a gap-reading/plugging ILB in a 3-4 did not play to his strengths. 

He's a much, much better fit for Hafley's 4-3 than the prior scheme and I think - if healthy - he will show that this year with a full season under his belt and play like he did the second half.

[BrewerFan]

On 3/2/2025 at 7:00 PM, LouisEly said:

But instead of Gonzalez for either that 2009 3rd or 2nd, they got ten years of William Clay Matthews III.

Ah, you get him for a 3rd, you still trade the 2-2nds and then...maybe you trade a future pick and don't take the 5th back. Don't want to give up the 4th pick that year as it was Lang, but...the point is, a great TE was traded for "just" a 2nd, Moss a 3rd or 4th(I thought the Pats had the higher 4th and that's why they got him).

Even Lynch. I thought we were in on him.

 

[LouisEly]

7 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

Ah, you get him for a 3rd, you still trade the 2-2nds and then...maybe you trade a future pick and don't take the 5th back.

They didn't have two 2nds in 2009.  The had one 2nd and two 3rds, which they packaged together to move up to draft Matthews.

If they don't take back the 5th and trade a 2010 3rd instead of the 2009 3rd, they lose eight years of Morgan Burnett.  The 2009 3rd is a moot point anyway because the Chiefs backed out and demanded a 2nd.  That's not on the Packers.  And they won the Super Bowl after the 2010 season anyway without Gonzalez.

[Joseph Zarr]

 

[CheezWizHed]

1 hour ago, Joseph Zarr said:

 

It made no sense to do anything else after the heartburn of last year.  

[HarryDoyle]

3 hours ago, Joseph Zarr said:

 

This was a no brainer. Did they really want to go back to parading in one scrub kicker after another?

[Joseph Zarr]

If true, I like quite a bit:

Very Packersy target. He is likely going to grade out as a 'League Average' guy. I think he's a bit better than that. And, let's be honest: Even if you think he's League average, the Packers need that after last season's D-Line performances. I personally think he's young, has traits and decent production, and would thrive in Green Bay.

[JosephC]

17 minutes ago, Joseph Zarr said:

If true, I like quite a bit:

Very Packersy target. He is likely going to grade out as a 'League Average' guy. I think he's a bit better than that. And, let's be honest: Even if you think he's League average, the Packers need that after last season's D-Line performances. I personally think he's young, has traits and decent production, and would thrive in Green Bay.

It all depends on the money involved.  I'm for it if it's something like a 3 year, 42 million dollar deal with something like 45% guaranteed.  The buzz leads me to believe that something like 4 years, 68 million with about 50% guaranteed is a possibility, that would be too rich for me considering he doesn't profile as a consistent pass-rush threat.

While looking around for information, I stumbled across this short clip.

 

[Joseph Zarr]

<popcorn gifs>

 

[OldHeidelberg]

2 hours ago, Joseph Zarr said:

If true, I like quite a bit:

Very Packersy target. He is likely going to grade out as a 'League Average' guy. I think he's a bit better than that. And, let's be honest: Even if you think he's League average, the Packers need that after last season's D-Line performances. I personally think he's young, has traits and decent production, and would thrive in Green Bay.

It's nice to hear they will be active in FA again, especially after they knocked it out of the park last offseason. 6'6" 286 lbs, a big DE who has some pass rushing skills would certainly be a welcome addition.

[Joseph Zarr]

The Legend of S Zayne Anderson grows: