Packers 2025 offseason

[LouisEly]

10 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

My garbage time comment was more so referring to the Lions and more so the Vikings, when the Packers got obliterated twice and cobbled together some crap way too late to make the final score look close.

First Vikings game the Packers were within 6 points with 10 minutes left:

 

How is that "garbage time"?

Second Lions game the Packers had the lead with 14 minutes left in the 4th quarter:

 

How is that "garbage time"?

[OldSchoolSnapper]

1 minute ago, CheezWizHed said:

This is however our biggest problem and holdback.  Love must be better if we want to win a SB. 

Getting a big FA WR would help him, but which one did people think would really help?  I was all in on Higgens, but we were blocked.  The next best WR is so well thought of that he is still available. So instead they fixed a hole in the OL with Myers leaving. 

Getting a good DE would've helped the pass rush, but after Mack resigned (before FA started) everyone that was left big money being thrown at mediocre players. 

What FA signing would've actually made people feel like we were "going for it"? Honestly, it looked like a bad year for what we needed in FA. 

I would have made the deal PIT did for Metcalfe. Once we didn't get him the cool thing to do was talk about how he wasn't worth it, but one problem is that people are constantly using old figures to find market value. Everybody knows damn well that if we had swung that deal everybody would have loved it. He is an animal, a physical freak, would be happy to block and he is just the kind of raw talent they don't have. He would alleviate everything for the rest of the WR group. He is just your star playmaker that they don't have. I don't think he's ever been in as good of a situation as he would have had in GB either.

Maybe there is a smidge of overpay, maybe he doesn't produce. But we are trying to compete for a Super Bowl here. There is risk involved if you want to hit a home run. If you couldn't get him, Godwin would have been a substantial upgrade. I don't buy they didn't have options. They chose to mitigate risk. Maybe they'll be right, who knows. 

On the pass rush side I am more inclined to agree. I am not big on Mack at this point. If they could have actually pursued Garrett, I'd have done that over Metcalfe, but who knows. I don't think they ever really chased down any of the big tickets, which is disappointing given where they are in the pecking order.

[SeaBass]

It sure seems to me some people on this board are all about the Packers needing to sign some huge FA every offseason or they're trash. Feel like nobody has been paying attention to how the Packers have operated for oh, the last 30+ years.

They signed Reggie White in free agency. That happened one time, in like 1993.

Where are these grand expectations of free agency daydreaming are coming from?

For the longest time people griped about Ted Thompson's non-activity in free agency and saying things along the lines of, "He doesn't have to sign the BEST guys out there, just add some solid pieces that can contribute."

Now Brian Gutekunst is doing that and we've graduated to, "Nope! Not good enough!"

LOL

[OldSchoolSnapper]

19 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

First Vikings game the Packers were within 6 points with 10 minutes left:

 

How is that "garbage time"?

Second Lions game the Packers had the lead with 14 minutes left in the 4th quarter:

 

How is that "garbage time"?

First Vikings game the Packers were within 6 points with 10 minutes left:

And down 28-7 at half. And lost. Did you see that game? Because they were getting curb-stomped the entire first 35 minutes.

Now post the other game against the Lions in which they trail 24-6 in the 4th, and the other game against the Vikings in which they are down 27-10 with 6 minutes left. Oh but wait, they lost that game by 2 so it must have been super close. If you're going to do this, post all the games.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

7 minutes ago, SeaBass said:

It sure seems to me some people on this board are all about the Packers needing to sign some huge FA every offseason or they're trash. Feel like nobody has been paying attention to how the Packers have operated for oh, the last 30+ years.

They signed Reggie White in free agency. That happened one time, in like 1993.

Where are these grand expectations of free agency daydreaming are coming from?

For the longest time people griped about Ted Thompson's non-activity in free agency and saying things along the lines of, "He doesn't have to sign the BEST guys out there, just add some solid pieces that can contribute."

Now Brian Gutekunst is doing that and we've graduated to, "Nope! Not good enough!"

LOL

 

The way the Packers do things makes sense the majority of the time. When you are right on the cusp of a championship, to me that is when you fill those last big holes with FA and go for it. They don't do that though. Also, this just isn't accurate. Ted actually did it, going for Peppers, who for all intents and purposes WAS that piece and should have gotten the '14 team over the hump.

I am not seeing where the confusion is though. What has Gute done this offseason that even counts as what you're suggesting? Nate Hobbs or the OG? Who both are presumably filling role for outgoing players. Hobbs is an upgrade I guess because Alexander doesn't even play, but he certainly isn't better.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

27 minutes ago, JosephC said:

2026 Super Bowl odds

1 - Eagles +650

2 - Ravens +700

3 - Chiefs +750

3 - Bills +750

5 - Lions +900

6 - Commanders +1600

7 - 49ers +1800

7 - Bengals +1800

9 - Packers +2200

9 - Rams +2200

Packers regular season wins over/under is 9.5.  Ravens, Bills, Lions, Chiefs, Eagles, 49ers all above that.  There are 8 teams at 6.5, which puts the Packers in the #7 to #14 range.

Projecting them as the 9th/10th best team at this time seems like a pretty fair estimate.

Above odds come from betus.com

Sounds about right. 10-7 with a loss in the 1st or 2nd round. I am not sure how the Bengals got in there with that defense.

[adambr2]

https://www.si.com/nfl/packers/study-concludes-packers-have-had-worst-drafts-over-last-decade
 

Not sure if this was posted yet, and if it was, I’m sure there was/will be some significant protesting/hand wringing over it.

I totally get that it’s just one subjective measurement, but I think it paints a pretty accurate picture that the front office has not done a good enough job for a draft and development team over the last decade.

[SeaBass]

3 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

 

The way the Packers do things makes sense the majority of the time. When you are right on the cusp of a championship, to me that is when you fill those last big holes with FA and go for it. They don't do that though. Also, this just isn't accurate. Ted actually did it, going for Peppers, who for all intents and purposes WAS that piece and should have gotten the '14 team over the hump.

I am not seeing where the confusion is though. What has Gute done this offseason that even counts as what you're suggesting? Nate Hobbs or the OG? Who both are presumably filling role for outgoing players. Hobbs is an upgrade I guess because Alexander doesn't even play, but he certainly isn't better.

"What has Gute done this offseason that even counts as what you're suggesting?"

You mean signing someone that can be called a solid contributor? I mean, dang, what's your definition of that anyway? Future Hall of Famer apparently. You're likely right, Hobbs is not giving people the impression he'll be a HoFer. Why is that your floor for acceptable roster construction? Reggie White and Julius Peppers. Cool.

So yeah I'm still really super confused.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

39 minutes ago, SeaBass said:

"What has Gute done this offseason that even counts as what you're suggesting?"

You mean signing someone that can be called a solid contributor? I mean, dang, what's your definition of that anyway? Future Hall of Famer apparently. You're likely right, Hobbs is not giving people the impression he'll be a HoFer. Why is that your floor for acceptable roster construction? Reggie White and Julius Peppers. Cool.

So yeah I'm still really super confused.

Except the guy came out at EOY and said it was time to compete for championships, which implies they aren't doing that or haven't done it. 

The follow-up to that was Hobbs and an interior lineman swap. I think we are taking a leap to say the team is better right now than it was last offseason.

I'm sure the Packers will be "fine." Fine is what they have mastered. Likely a playoff team, though even that seems up in the air in their division/conference, but not one of the very top teams.

[CheezWizHed]

20 hours ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

I would have made the deal PIT did for Metcalfe. Once we didn't get him the cool thing to do was talk about how he wasn't worth it, but one problem is that people are constantly using old figures to find market value. Everybody knows damn well that if we had swung that deal everybody would have loved it. He is an animal, a physical freak, would be happy to block and he is just the kind of raw talent they don't have. He would alleviate everything for the rest of the WR group. He is just your star playmaker that they don't have. I don't think he's ever been in as good of a situation as he would have had in GB either.

Maybe there is a smidge of overpay, maybe he doesn't produce. But we are trying to compete for a Super Bowl here. There is risk involved if you want to hit a home run. If you couldn't get him, Godwin would have been a substantial upgrade. I don't buy they didn't have options. They chose to mitigate risk. Maybe they'll be right, who knows. 

On the pass rush side I am more inclined to agree. I am not big on Mack at this point. If they could have actually pursued Garrett, I'd have done that over Metcalfe, but who knows. I don't think they ever really chased down any of the big tickets, which is disappointing given where they are in the pecking order.

Metcalf does seem like the only realistic "needle mover" the Packers could've gotten this off season.  In hindsight, Garrett being on the trade market seemed like a negotiation ploy as they were clearly talking about extensions.  Godwin turned down an extra $20M from "somebody" to stay with Tampa.  

I think everyone wanted a bigger splash, but when looking at the options... I just don't see that there were many opportunities.

19 hours ago, adambr2 said:

https://www.si.com/nfl/packers/study-concludes-packers-have-had-worst-drafts-over-last-decade
 

Not sure if this was posted yet, and if it was, I’m sure there was/will be some significant protesting/hand wringing over it.

I totally get that it’s just one subjective measurement, but I think it paints a pretty accurate picture that the front office has not done a good enough job for a draft and development team over the last decade.

For the whole draft, they used "awards" as their proof for whole drafts - Pro Bowls, All-Pro, SuperBowl Winners... SuperBowl Winners is a bit of an odd metric since most players drafted by KC become "Super Bowl Winners"...regardless if they sat on the bench or actually contributed. But the one thing it does show is that the Packers are not good at drafting big impact players. 

I think if you used PFF WAR (or other individual contribution metric) for the whole draft, it would probably show a different story.  Just from the eyeball check, the Packers are good at drafting good to very good players.  We are lacking the great ones but also rarely have any bad misses. 

 

[LouisEly]

22 hours ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

And down 28-7 at half. And lost. Did you see that game? Because they were getting curb-stomped the entire first 35 minutes.

Good thing games are 60 minutes, not 35.  Ask the Buffalo Bills how nice that is.

And Jordan Love wasn't 100% - he was questionable at game time with his knee injury that caused him to miss the prior two weeks.  Or did you not remember that?

22 hours ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

If you're going to do this, post all the games.

I don't have to, because you said it was both games against the Lions and Vikings.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

1 hour ago, LouisEly said:

Good thing games are 60 minutes, not 35.  Ask the Buffalo Bills how nice that is.

And Jordan Love wasn't 100% - he was questionable at game time with his knee injury that caused him to miss the prior two weeks.  Or did you not remember that?

I don't have to, because you said it was both games against the Lions and Vikings.

I did not, actually, I said it was both games against the Vikings but I can see how that was confusing based on the sentence. Which it mostly was. It happens every week in the NFL where a defense goes soft in the second half to play the clock game. They got barnstormed in the first half of both games and never had a lead in either one. At no point were they in control of either game, the second one was just a bit worse than the first. In all of these examples, once the Packers closed the gap, the opponents immediately widened it again - another trend we saw a LOT of with last year's team.

It's all splitting hairs to me anyway, who really cares if they had a lead in the 3rd quarter against DET or whatever, they could never close all year and they lost. It'd be one thing if we were stuck on one game, but they were 1-5 in their division and 2-5 against the playoff field. They beat a skeleton crew LAR and HOU. They had a lot of chances to pick up a signature win and failed over and over again. It was crystal clear they were good, not great. It was a clear trend with last year's team. They don't have a Clay Matthews/Reggie White/Charles Woodson on the team, on either side of the ball really. The closest thing was Josh Jacobs. And MLF was a chronic fart machine last year in those marquee games.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

23 hours ago, adambr2 said:

https://www.si.com/nfl/packers/study-concludes-packers-have-had-worst-drafts-over-last-decade
 

Not sure if this was posted yet, and if it was, I’m sure there was/will be some significant protesting/hand wringing over it.

I totally get that it’s just one subjective measurement, but I think it paints a pretty accurate picture that the front office has not done a good enough job for a draft and development team over the last decade.

The best player on both sides of the ball on the current team is a free agent. Bit of a problem when you think you're a draft and develop team. I don't buy they're the worst drafting team in the league because not every pick is created equally. If you draft your QBs correctly and they generally have, that is much more significant than getting a Pro Bowl LG and CB that play at that level for 3 years. I do think their drafting is much worse than most of the fans act though.

[Fear The Chorizo]

21 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

The best player on both sides of the ball on the current team is a free agent. Bit of a problem when you think you're a draft and develop team. I don't buy they're the worst drafting team in the league because not every pick is created equally. If you draft your QBs correctly and they generally have, that is much more significant than getting a Pro Bowl LG and CB that play at that level for 3 years. I do think their drafting is much worse than most of the fans act though.

Yeah I don't buy the Packers are the worst drafting team in the NFL....how much of that metric is based on consistently picking towards the end of most rounds?  Every team has significant misses - I think the current Packer front office does a great job in the middle rounds finding starting caliber players on both sides of the ball, but where they struggle is drafting a guy at one of the marquee positions in today's NFL (WR, DL/edge rusher, T) early and have it be obvious they hit a HR as soon as that player steps onto the practice field.  Frankly, a big part of that issue is the Packers either don't draft those positions in round 1 (WR, T), or they take raw development projects like Gary/LVN who take years to sort out if they're going to make an impact.  At some point they need to target obvious holes on their roster in round 1 drafts at positions like OLB or WR, with the expectations that those players turn those existing roster weaknesses into strengths simply by entering the building.

The Packers have hit on QBs drafted early - they've only had to attempt doing it twice in the last ~25+ seasons, which is insane, but assuming Love is at minimum an above-average NFL starter you can't question their approach with how they've maintained quality at by far the NFL's most important position compared to pretty much any other team in the league over the same timespan.

[adambr2]

I don’t believe the Packers are the worst in the NFL at drafting. However, I also concur that they are far worse than most fans believe.

My impression of Gute off memory alone without much research is that he is probably average to above average on Days 2 and 3, and one of the worst in the league in the 1st round. 

Unfortunately, that’s your best chance at an impact player and that checks out with their results the last decade — plenty of decent roster contributors, not nearly enough elite impact players.

Food for thought — the best 1st round pick in the Brian Gutekunst era is a still young corner that we are debating cutting for nothing rather than dealing with his antics and constant injuries another year.

That’s not good.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

1 hour ago, adambr2 said:

I don’t believe the Packers are the worst in the NFL at drafting. However, I also concur that they are far worse than most fans believe.

My impression of Gute off memory alone without much research is that he is probably average to above average on Days 2 and 3, and one of the worst in the league in the 1st round. 

Unfortunately, that’s your best chance at an impact player and that checks out with their results the last decade — plenty of decent roster contributors, not nearly enough elite impact players.

Food for thought — the best 1st round pick in the Brian Gutekunst era is a still young corner that we are debating cutting for nothing rather than dealing with his antics and constant injuries another year.

That’s not good.

Wouldn't it be Jordan Love? There is a lot of yikes in those 1st round picks, but I would put Love higher than Jaire given the circumstances and the cajones to make the pick.

Savage and Stokes suck. Wyatt/Gary are certainly decent NFL players but probably perfect examples of guys whose value is exaggerated by the hometown fans. Jordan Morgan is who knows, LVN also still gets a bit of a pass but does not look good. Walker I am not quite ready to call a bust but this season would be the make or break. 

One thing is obvious though. These guys, even the ones who round out, are almost never contributing right away, which is a problem. You need way more than that out of 9 first round picks. The most important one was an at-least-decent QB which forgives a lot.

[CheezWizHed]

1 hour ago, adambr2 said:

I don’t believe the Packers are the worst in the NFL at drafting. However, I also concur that they are far worse than most fans believe.

My impression of Gute off memory alone without much research is that he is probably average to above average on Days 2 and 3, and one of the worst in the league in the 1st round. 

Unfortunately, that’s your best chance at an impact player and that checks out with their results the last decade — plenty of decent roster contributors, not nearly enough elite impact players.

Food for thought — the best 1st round pick in the Brian Gutekunst era is a still young corner that we are debating cutting for nothing rather than dealing with his antics and constant injuries another year.

That’s not good.

Agreed.  In principle, Gute's approach is decent - young, highly athletic, raw players, but the result has been some good players that take a few years to produce (if they do).  Having that happen occasionally isn't bad, but when we do it nearly every time it has been a killer. 

But he seems to make a living in the 2-4th round range.  Pretty reminiscent of Ron Wolf honestly.  

The odd thing that I read in that article said that Gute was ranked around 12th in PFF WAR for his first round picks despite averaging pick location somewhere in the 20s. No booms, but no busts either I guess. 

 

[LouisEly]

2 hours ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

Savage and Stokes suck. Wyatt/Gary are certainly decent NFL players but probably perfect examples of guys whose value is exaggerated by the hometown fans.

I give Stokes a pass because he got injured.  He looked good his rookie year, then the leg injuries hit.  His game was speed, and when a speed guy at a speed position gets leg injuries that takes away his value.  I liken him to Craig Newsome - he had the knee injury and then he was out of the league two years later.  It's football, injuries happen.  Gary was just starting to shine when he had the knee injury; he had 6 sacks in 9 games that year before he went down; that's on pace for an 11 sack season.

Savage was below average for sure, but using Pro-Football-Reference.com's wAV as a proxy, there were seven first round picks that year with a lower wAV than him and two others tied with him.  Their 2nd round pick that year was Elgton Jenkins; only D.K. Metcalf, A.J. Brown, and Deebo Samuel are ahead of him from that 2nd round. 

Context also matters.  Some years are better than others.  Wyatt has 4.5 more sacks than any other DT taken in the 2022 draft, and if you also include the 2021 draft only two DTs from both drafts combined have more sacks than him and they each have 1.5 more and have played one more season.   It's hard to pick a better player when there isn't one available in that draft at that position.  The Love pick was better than most think - he has a higher career wAV than 16 players drafted ahead of him and Love sat for three years.  Love's average wAV over the last two seasons is second only to CeeDee Lamb among all 1st rounders in 2020.

It's really hard to compare across teams because you have to throw out injuries (unless it's a repeat injury from college) and you have to normalize based on draft slot and overall talent level for that year.  You also have to account for special situations like Love who was drafted to be a backup for at least a year if not more.

[Brian]

LOL, NFL's prima donna Aaron Rodgers expressed frustration with the New York Jets for having him fly out to New York on his own dime for a meeting that resulted in him being released. 🤣  

[CheezWizHed]

3 hours ago, Brian said:

LOL, NFL's prima donna Aaron Rodgers expressed frustration with the New York Jets for having him fly out to New York on his own dime for a meeting that resulted in him being released. 🤣  

Well, if he'd just answer his phone...

[HarryDoyle]

16 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

Well, if he'd just answer his phone...

But then he'd complain that the Jets didn't have the courage to tell him to his face.

[adambr2]

I’m not saying they didn’t do him dirty, but … you asked for a trade to arguably the most dysfunctional franchise in the NFL.

What did you expect?

[bigred]

On 4/16/2025 at 12:38 PM, SeaBass said:

It sure seems to me some people on this board are all about the Packers needing to sign some huge FA every offseason or they're trash. Feel like nobody has been paying attention to how the Packers have operated for oh, the last 30+ years.

They signed Reggie White in free agency. That happened one time, in like 1993.

Where are these grand expectations of free agency daydreaming are coming from?

For the longest time people griped about Ted Thompson's non-activity in free agency and saying things along the lines of, "He doesn't have to sign the BEST guys out there, just add some solid pieces that can contribute."

Now Brian Gutekunst is doing that and we've graduated to, "Nope! Not good enough!"

LOL

It would be nice, though, if they actually would sign a big free agent once in a while. Especially when they have plenty of cap room, like they did this offseason. 

Also, Love is good, but it's unlikely he'll ever be great. That means they really should try to get him at least 2 top notch WR's to throw to. He's not the type of QB like Rodgers and Favre, who can make "average at best" type of WR's look like HOF'ers. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

31 minutes ago, bigred said:

It would be nice, though, if they actually would sign a big free agent once in a while. Especially when they have plenty of cap room, like they did this offseason. 

Also, Love is good, but it's unlikely he'll ever be great. That means they really should try to get him at least 2 top notch WR's to throw to. He's not the type of QB like Rodgers and Favre, who can make "average at best" type of WR's look like HOF'ers. 

They signed the top safety and one of the top RBs to their team last offseason in free agency.  Gute signed the Smiths in the same free agent offseason.  Despite the current cap room, they do have in-house talent that will need to get paid over the next calendar year if they don't want to have cap issues again in the near future, and some of this year's cap room will get eaten up with extension signing bonuses.

 

Gute has been fine in free agency when both a need and the right players are available to sign.  You can't play in that sandbox every offseason as a GM though 

[CheezWizHed]

1 hour ago, bigred said:

It would be nice, though, if they actually would sign a big free agent once in a while. Especially when they have plenty of cap room, like they did this offseason. 

Also, Love is good, but it's unlikely he'll ever be great. That means they really should try to get him at least 2 top notch WR's to throw to. He's not the type of QB like Rodgers and Favre, who can make "average at best" type of WR's look like HOF'ers. 

Who would you have signed this season?