Game 8: Panthers @ Packers - Sunday, Nov 2nd 12:00 PM

[HarveysWBs]

I usually feel better the day after a loss, but not today. I’m somehow more frustrated by it than I was previously, and this is even before I saw the Kraft ACL tear confirmation just now.

LaFleur said at half time that the Panthers were doing exactly what they were expected to do: slow the game down and try to win this at the end. The Carolina D created a shell that allowed for solid movement through the air between the 20s, but we had no answer in red zone situations until we just pounded Jacobs late for a TD—too late, as it turned out. The fact that we could not run them out of that shell is a five alarm fire, considering what the team thinks its identity should be.

Meanwhile, everyone knew exactly what the Panthers would try to do on offense, and it was the only thing they really could do on offense, considering the health of their line and their QB: let Dowdle run all day. And while giving up 16 is not as disastrous as scoring 13 points at home, what was the one thing the Packers D needed to do late? Make Young beat them—and they couldn’t do that.

Add it all up and you get a wounded and thoroughly average Carolina Panthers team that came to Lambeau and dictated terms to a supposed title contender. This is the kind of game that gets people fired. Not now, because in-season changes are panicky and dumb. But there should be some accountability for this at some point. I’d imagine Policy has some interesting thoughts.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

4 hours ago, adambr2 said:

One thing that got a little overlooked because of all the other issues was how bad the 2 minute drive before halftime was. I remember saying “ok, you’ve got 3 timeouts, 2 minutes, and you’re at midfield. ZERO reason for the clock to become an issue.”

Well, a couple dive calls to Jacobs later accompanied with some holding penalties and the time was cut in half, still at midfield.

They were fortunately able to get a couple long plays to salvage the drive and get 3, but they should have just been able to run their offense and had no issues.

MLF is never going to change. It’s the same mistakes season after season with no learning from the same mistakes.

Don't worry. Rich Bisaccia is going to help with the clock management.

[kestrel79]

The clock management has been bad, really bad end of game and the halves. Like I have zero trust if it's a close game in the playoffs we'll be able to manage things good. Just wasting time, not using time outs in the right spots. Not sure if that's Love, MLF, or both but it's bad.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

2 hours ago, HarveysWBs said:

I usually feel better the day after a loss, but not today. I’m somehow more frustrated by it than I was previously, and this is even before I saw the Kraft ACL tear confirmation just now.

LaFleur said at half time that the Panthers were doing exactly what they were expected to do: slow the game down and try to win this at the end. The Carolina D created a shell that allowed for solid movement through the air between the 20s, but we had no answer in red zone situations until we just pounded Jacobs late for a TD—too late, as it turned out. The fact that we could not run them out of that shell is a five alarm fire, considering what the team thinks its identity should be.

Meanwhile, everyone knew exactly what the Panthers would try to do on offense, and it was the only thing they really could do on offense, considering the health of their line and their QB: let Dowdle run all day. And while giving up 16 is not as disastrous as scoring 13 points at home, what was the one thing the Packers D needed to do late? Make Young beat them—and they couldn’t do that.

Add it all up and you get a wounded and thoroughly average Carolina Panthers team that came to Lambeau and dictated terms to a supposed title contender. This is the kind of game that gets people fired. Not now, because in-season changes are panicky and dumb. But there should be some accountability for this at some point. I’d imagine Policy has some interesting thoughts.

MLF is going to be fired this offseason. That is my prediction. They will underachieve again, win 10 or so games, lose early in the playoffs and the brass will have seen enough. Not the results they are looking for after trading away first round draft picks.

[MrTPlush]

Yah, I think MLF might finally be cooked. I don’t know that he is bad, but I am very confident that he isn’t a net positive either.

Love also seems to not be that guy. But we are much more stuck with him and improving on him isn’t really a simple task. And seeing him under a different coach could be beneficial.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Love has a QB rating of 108 and is 6th in QBR this season playing most of it without Watson and Reed, and an interior OL that is hurt, sucks or possibly both. He has turned the ball over 3 times. His accuracy is up drastically this season (eclipsing 70%) and he has a career high in YPA. He has however almost been sacked as many times as he was all of last season already. He is, pretty objectively, having his best season.

I don't really understand the slander he's been taking, I guess because he's not Josh Allen or something. I think he is plenty good enough to be a championship QB, but this team is, IMO, bottom 1/3 of the league on both sides of its line. They also do not force turnovers hardly ever. Defensively they are still kind of disappointing, but it's not because of Parsons not playing well.

Banks and Hobbs were terrible additions, Jenkins is not working at center. Eight weeks in, when you think about it, nothing should be all that surprising. There was a chorus right before the Parsons trade (myself included) that felt they were the same good but not great team they were last year. Parsons really inflated their hype a bit, but they do kinda look like the same level of team of the past 2 years. Philadelphia will be a good litmus test. The difference between this year and last thus far has been that last year, they beat everyone they should have, but couldn't beat anyone good. This year they haven't really been tested outside of Week 1, which, eh, Week 1, and I guess Pittsburgh is decent. I am invested in what kind of effort we get this weekend.

They have looked right about the 5-3 team they are lucky not to be. If they play well and win, it should emphasize that the NFC is up for grabs and they are a contender. 

[adambr2]

1 hour ago, kestrel79 said:

The clock management has been bad, really bad end of game and the halves. Like I have zero trust if it's a close game in the playoffs we'll be able to manage things good. Just wasting time, not using time outs in the right spots. Not sure if that's Love, MLF, or both but it's bad.

As best as I can tell, MLF goes into “well goodness, we can’t give them the ball back” mode in any drive that begins with less than 4 minutes left in a half. 

I can appreciate that he’s at least THINKING about that, but he overplays it to an extreme degree. There’s no tempo to it at all. He does whatever he can to kill the first couple minutes immediately, only to inevitably scramble in the last minute when they’re running out of time.

[CheezWizHed]

If people are ready to give up on Love, I'll say you've been too spoiled by our past QBs.  He made a significant jump this year and you really need to see that.  Not just the numbers, but in certain throws that he didn't make in years past.  

I've been one of his critics this year, but mainly pointing out things that hold him back from being a Tier 1 QB.  Against the Steelers, he looked exactly what we expect from a Tier 1 QB.  But then didn't yesterday (again failing to handle blitzes and making quick instinctual decisions).  Dumping him now would be a bad idea.  

MLF has his weaknesses, but I'll still say many items you guys rail on him for fall in Love more than MLF.  Play clock management, for example (not play calls when managing clock, but getting people lined up on time). Honestly, he reminds me of MM a bit... really good at somethings, but struggled at others.  He is easily a top 10 coach in the league with only a few clearly ahead of him... again tier 2 and not quite tier 1.  I don't think it will be easy to replace him...and very easy to get someone worse.

Jenkins.  Not enough people are talking about how poor Jenkins has been at center.  Career path for him has been downward since his rookie year.  Twice yesterday, he slid over for a double team and totally missed a blitzer right up the middle.  He was so focused on the double team that he didn't even react to him running a couple feet from him.  We'd be better off with Josh Myers back at center... (not to mention Jenkins over Banks at LG). 

D-Line was also horrid yesterday.  Seemed like there were very few stops made by the DL and the LB were making initial contact 3-4 yards down field.  Really need better depth there behind Wooden. 

As poorly as Young played yesterday, we should've won that easily... 

I've held my tongue on Banks and Hobbs...trying to be patient and give them time to get healthy and acclimated, but wow that FA class is looking REALLY bad.  Banks is fine when he plays... but that "when" is rare.  Dude is made of tissue paper.  Hobbs... well, we couldn't even play him at slot CB and have him produce.  I wasn't expecting a shutdown CB, but he is significantly lower than his Raider numbers too. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

1 hour ago, adambr2 said:

As best as I can tell, MLF goes into “well goodness, we can’t give them the ball back” mode in any drive that begins with less than 4 minutes left in a half. 

I can appreciate that he’s at least THINKING about that, but he overplays it to an extreme degree. There’s no tempo to it at all. He does whatever he can to kill the first couple minutes immediately, only to inevitably scramble in the last minute when they’re running out of time.

The point of playing offense is to score points - the longer a possession goes, the better chance a penalty, drop, sack, turnover, etc happens to kill a drive and force a punt with no points.  It feels to me like MLF has 5-10 "get 3-6 yard" plays that would be considered chain-movers/high percentage plays, but winds up going to them way too often - so the Packers are constantly faced with converting 3-4 3rd downs any drive to score a TD.  Chunk play attempts seem to happen on 3rd down, whether it's 3rd and short or 3rd and long.  I think MLF falls into the trap of time of possession / ball control hyper focus and doesn't get aggressive with chunk plays throughout a game.  Get a lead, playcall conservatively - and then trying to limit possessions on top of that hamstrings your own team's ability to put points on the board.

Hell, wasting playclocks and taking too long to even get plays in plagued the Packers with MLF even with Rodgers under center....so the consistent issue is MLF and his playcalling.

I get the mentality of playing keep away from your opponent as the clock winds to half, and of course as the game is ending....but I sure wouldn't mind taking the opposite approach and trying to score quickly and leave enough time on the game clock for your defense to force a 3 and out and give the Packers yet another possession heading into halftime - especially if you're tied or losing the game against an inferior opponent.

I think this Packers team would be playing its best football if it's trying to maximize possessions to score points, and then unleash their pass rush - rather than playing into a ball-control type team's hands intentionally limiting possessions/scoring opportunities and letting them stay in a super conservative game plan the entire day, forcing your defense to stuff a balanced run/short passing game attack that they aren't amazing at.

 

[yourout]

1 hour ago, CheezWizHed said:

If people are ready to give up on Love, I'll say you've been too spoiled by our past QBs.  He made a significant jump this year and you really need to see that.  Not just the numbers, but in certain throws that he didn't make in years past.  

I've been one of his critics this year, but mainly pointing out things that hold him back from being a Tier 1 QB.  Against the Steelers, he looked exactly what we expect from a Tier 1 QB.  But then didn't yesterday (again failing to handle blitzes and making quick instinctual decisions).  Dumping him now would be a bad idea.  

MLF has his weaknesses, but I'll still say many items you guys rail on him for fall in Love more than MLF.  Play clock management, for example (not play calls when managing clock, but getting people lined up on time). Honestly, he reminds me of MM a bit... really good at somethings, but struggled at others.  He is easily a top 10 coach in the league with only a few clearly ahead of him... again tier 2 and not quite tier 1.  I don't think it will be easy to replace him...and very easy to get someone worse.

Jenkins.  Not enough people are talking about how poor Jenkins has been at center.  Career path for him has been downward since his rookie year.  Twice yesterday, he slid over for a double team and totally missed a blitzer right up the middle.  He was so focused on the double team that he didn't even react to him running a couple feet from him.  We'd be better off with Josh Myers back at center... (not to mention Jenkins over Banks at LG). 

D-Line was also horrid yesterday.  Seemed like there were very few stops made by the DL and the LB were making initial contact 3-4 yards down field.  Really need better depth there behind Wooden. 

As poorly as Young played yesterday, we should've won that easily... 

I've held my tongue on Banks and Hobbs...trying to be patient and give them time to get healthy and acclimated, but wow that FA class is looking REALLY bad.  Banks is fine when he plays... but that "when" is rare.  Dude is made of tissue paper.  Hobbs... well, we couldn't even play him at slot CB and have him produce.  I wasn't expecting a shutdown CB, but he is significantly lower than his Raider numbers too. 

In my opinion MLF is somewhere between 10 and 15.

https://www.phillyvoice.com/nfl-head-coach-power-rankings-2025-news-analysis-super-bowl-nick-sirianni-andy-reid-fired-new-coaches/

 

[BrewerFan]

7 hours ago, HarveysWBs said:

I usually feel better the day after a loss, but not today. I’m somehow more frustrated by it than I was previously, and this is even before I saw the Kraft ACL tear confirmation just now.

LaFleur said at half time that the Panthers were doing exactly what they were expected to do: slow the game down and try to win this at the end. The Carolina D created a shell that allowed for solid movement through the air between the 20s, but we had no answer in red zone situations until we just pounded Jacobs late for a TD—too late, as it turned out. The fact that we could not run them out of that shell is a five alarm fire, considering what the team thinks its identity should be.

The Kraft injury is just brutal. I like Musgraves a lot. I think he's a nice TE, but Kraft was becoming one of the best TEs and he is just so physical after the catch. But more than that, with this identity they're trying to establish on offense... that doesn't make sense to me. This more slow, methodical offense, he was the guy who'd pick you up on 3rd and 10, just blast through a CB and pick up the 1st down.

 

As for the Panthers trying to slow this game down... yes, that sure be their plan. And you should be good enough to not allow them to. 

[LouisEly]

5 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

As for the Panthers trying to slow this game down... yes, that sure be their plan. And you should be good enough to not allow them to.

When one of your starting DTs goes down in the first half and you're down to 3 healthy active bodies there - one an undrafted rookie and one an undersized pass rusher - that makes it really hard to stop the run.  

Carolina is 5th in rushing YPG and 9th in rushing YPC, so they're actually pretty good in running the ball.

They need to get NO on the line and see what they need for Godchaux or Shepherd.  Or both.

[BrewerFan]

2 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

If people are ready to give up on Love, I'll say you've been too spoiled by our past QBs.  He made a significant jump this year and you really need to see that.  Not just the numbers, but in certain throws that he didn't make in years past.  

I've been one of his critics this year, but mainly pointing out things that hold him back from being a Tier 1 QB.  Against the Steelers, he looked exactly what we expect from a Tier 1 QB.  But then didn't yesterday (again failing to handle blitzes and making quick instinctual decisions).  Dumping him now would be a bad idea.  

MLF has his weaknesses, but I'll still say many items you guys rail on him for fall in Love more than MLF.  Play clock management, for example (not play calls when managing clock, but getting people lined up on time). Honestly, he reminds me of MM a bit... really good at somethings, but struggled at others.  He is easily a top 10 coach in the league with only a few clearly ahead of him... again tier 2 and not quite tier 1.  I don't think it will be easy to replace him...and very easy to get someone worse.

Jenkins.  Not enough people are talking about how poor Jenkins has been at center.  Career path for him has been downward since his rookie year.  Twice yesterday, he slid over for a double team and totally missed a blitzer right up the middle.  He was so focused on the double team that he didn't even react to him running a couple feet from him.  We'd be better off with Josh Myers back at center... (not to mention Jenkins over Banks at LG). 

D-Line was also horrid yesterday.  Seemed like there were very few stops made by the DL and the LB were making initial contact 3-4 yards down field.  Really need better depth there behind Wooden. 

As poorly as Young played yesterday, we should've won that easily... 

I've held my tongue on Banks and Hobbs...trying to be patient and give them time to get healthy and acclimated, but wow that FA class is looking REALLY bad.  Banks is fine when he plays... but that "when" is rare.  Dude is made of tissue paper.  Hobbs... well, we couldn't even play him at slot CB and have him produce.  I wasn't expecting a shutdown CB, but he is significantly lower than his Raider numbers too. 

The whole plan with the OL seems to have backfired. MLF or Gutey... whoever was behind the decision, they went from a more athletic zone blocking scheme to wanting bigger, gap scheme with more bigger OL and it's... really not working out. Especially along the interior.

That doesn't' really explain Jenkins. I don't think he's been quite as bad as you. I think he's been better than Myers, but that's also a really low standard. He was particularly bad yesterday. Derrick Brown is a nice player and all, but... shouldn't be enough to wreck your OL. 

DL... Brinson and Wooden were out by the end, but you just had a guy like Mike Pennel who has been a really good run stuffer, a guy who has said he wanted to come back to GB. He was just a FA last week. You have to know Stackhouse isn't... good yet. Maybe he will be. I don't think that's the case. I see now why Brinson was drafted ahead of him. But as frustrating as it was at times, the inability to stop them on that last drive, this was still about 90% on the offense.

Whatever identify the Packers had on offense, they just lost in Kraft. The defense wasn't great yesterday, but... they held them to 16 points. They allowed Carolina to control the clock at times and have long drives, but that shouldn't be enough. I know the identify is supposed to be Jacobs and he's done his job, but all we've really done is gone to a more run heavy offense, but a less efficient offense after Love's 1st year starting when we seemingly started a transition from a zone scheme to a gap scheme. Jacobs is durable and he's worth what he's getting, but we're pretty predictable. He's not making guys miss, he's running through arm tackles and falling forward. But that's not much without hitting on the big plays and the big plays we're hitting on are either Kraft running for 60 yards or recently Watson coming down with a contested catch.

This team has such swings that it's baffling to me. 

 

At least you can address the FA mistakes without huge hits after this season, but I'd rather see this team come out and try and establish the PASS first and then use the run game. I don't think we'll do that and I don't think the run game is going to be real effective vs Philly. But we'll see. 

[BrewerFan]

17 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

When one of your starting DTs goes down in the first half and you're down to 3 healthy active bodies there - one an undrafted rookie and one an undersized pass rusher - that makes it really hard to stop the run.  

Carolina is 5th in rushing YPG and 9th in rushing YPC, so they're actually pretty good in running the ball.

They need to get NO on the line and see what they need for Godchaux or Shepherd.  Or both.

That makes the decision to make Brinson a healthy scratch all the more confusing. Or to not go out and get Mike Pennel... a really effective run stuffer who just this past week asked for and got his release from the Bengals and who in the off-season said he wanted to retire a Packer. 

 

But sure, in game... I'm not complaining about the DL not stopping the run better. I'm saying this team should be good enough to overcome that. And they were on defense. 16 points. What did we have yesterday? A fumble in the Redzone, at least 1 turnover on downs, a pick when we were driving. That 2nd turnover on downs came just outside of the redzone I believe. 

 

No, the offense should be good enough to overcome that. If Carolina can dictate the pace of place IN Green Bay... I mean... that's ridiculous. 

You go out and get a dominant pass rusher and he's dominant exactly how you hoped he would, you pay your QB like a franchise QB... and he's mostly playing like you hope he would. And we're playing a slow, methodical game. 

It reminds me of the Packers under McCarthy when the Packers wouldn't get much offense going until they had to go tempo and put the game more in Rodgers hands and they'd get something going. 

[BrewerFan]

2 hours ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

The point of playing offense is to score points - the longer a possession goes, the better chance a penalty, drop, sack, turnover, etc happens to kill a drive and force a punt with no points.  It feels to me like MLF has 5-10 "get 3-6 yard" plays that would be considered chain-movers/high percentage plays, but winds up going to them way too often - so the Packers are constantly faced with converting 3-4 3rd downs any drive to score a TD.  Chunk play attempts seem to happen on 3rd down, whether it's 3rd and short or 3rd and long.  I think MLF falls into the trap of time of possession / ball control hyper focus and doesn't get aggressive with chunk plays throughout a game.  Get a lead, playcall conservatively - and then trying to limit possessions on top of that hamstrings your own team's ability to put points on the board.

Hell, wasting playclocks and taking too long to even get plays in plagued the Packers with MLF even with Rodgers under center....so the consistent issue is MLF and his playcalling.

I get the mentality of playing keep away from your opponent as the clock winds to half, and of course as the game is ending....but I sure wouldn't mind taking the opposite approach and trying to score quickly and leave enough time on the game clock for your defense to force a 3 and out and give the Packers yet another possession heading into halftime - especially if you're tied or losing the game against an inferior opponent.

I think this Packers team would be playing its best football if it's trying to maximize possessions to score points, and then unleash their pass rush - rather than playing into a ball-control type team's hands intentionally limiting possessions/scoring opportunities and letting them stay in a super conservative game plan the entire day, forcing your defense to stuff a balanced run/short passing game attack that they aren't amazing at.

 

I agree with all of this. 

[AKCheesehead]

On 10/29/2025 at 8:38 AM, homer said:

trap game with Philly on deck

You called that one.  I felt it too.  Decided not to watch yesterday, thankfully.  

[JosephC]

I can't believe so many Packer fans still view Kenny Clark as a completely expendable throw-in in the Parsons deal.

I wonder what it would have taken Gutekunst to get out of including Clark in that trade?  A third round pick and a different player?  A second round pick?  Of course Jones is going to say that Clark was an essential piece as he is going to sell the press on the idea that the trade was made on terms that he dictated.  I would have to believe that the Packers could have gotten Clark removed from the trade, and they would be much better for it if they could have done so.

[adambr2]

One other beef I’ve got: enough with the crap of carrying two kickers. Nobody does that. Now we had to cut a backup TE, a position that we’re suddenly really thin at, and lost him to the Vikings, because we just couldn’t let Havrisik go.

If McManus is your guy and you believe in him, cut Havrisik and don’t concern yourself with who picks him up.

If you’re sold on Havrisik, then cut McManus and keep Havrisik.

What they’re doing now benefits no one. You have a backup kicker inactive and not contributing to anyone, while you have a starting kicker constantly looking over his shoulder because you’re keeping a second kicker on the roster. Not exactly a vote of confidence.

Make a damn decision and live with it.

[BrewerFan]

1 hour ago, JosephC said:

I can't believe so many Packer fans still view Kenny Clark as a completely expendable throw-in in the Parsons deal.

I wonder what it would have taken Gutekunst to get out of including Clark in that trade?  A third round pick and a different player?  A second round pick?  Of course Jones is going to say that Clark was an essential piece as he is going to sell the press on the idea that the trade was made on terms that he dictated.  I would have to believe that the Packers could have gotten Clark removed from the trade, and they would be much better for it if they could have done so.

I loved Kenny Clark. I didn't think he was expendable, but I certainly thought and... still think that trade was a great trade. I thought this was likely to be Clark's last year in Green Bay given his cap hit.

But I agree, losing Clark hurt. We've had time to make up for his run defense which... at least according to PFF is not great this year(though he's been a very good pass rusher).

I believe Jones wanted a DT because every report from every team seems to come with that caveat. He wanted to trade with the Jets for Quinnen Williams and 2 1sts... but the Jets said they didn't' have the resources(they didn't want to pay him).  Now even Williams is the subject of trade rumors and HE is rumored to be available for a Day2 pick and he's younger and playing at a much higher level than Clark.

So I don't think Clark was going to get more than a 5th or later with his age and contract and I think he was likely playing his final year in Green Bay. 

There were reports the Packers tried to make the trade without Clark as it did leave us vulnerable to start the season, but Jones insisted. 

 

But if you believe Jones or the other rumors that seem to confirm that... I don't think it really matters.

The Packers gave up 16 points to the Panthers. The defense has done it's job in every game but one. And even that game, they were dominant until ST's and a strip sack in the last 20 seconds of the half got the Cowboys back into the game.

 

The problem is the offense. Carolina couldn't stop the Packers... penalties and a slow, methodical style of play cost the Packers that game. The run defense was bad... but this is on Love the OL, MLF.  Most of the Packers struggles have been on that side of the ball. 

[BrewerFan]

4 hours ago, adambr2 said:

One other beef I’ve got: enough with the crap of carrying two kickers. Nobody does that. Now we had to cut a backup TE, a position that we’re suddenly really thin at, and lost him to the Vikings, because we just couldn’t let Havrisik go.

If McManus is your guy and you believe in him, cut Havrisik and don’t concern yourself with who picks him up.

If you’re sold on Havrisik, then cut McManus and keep Havrisik.

What they’re doing now benefits no one. You have a backup kicker inactive and not contributing to anyone, while you have a starting kicker constantly looking over his shoulder because you’re keeping a second kicker on the roster. Not exactly a vote of confidence.

Make a damn decision and live with it.

 

Men, Ben Sims would be AWESOME to have right now!

Can you imagine how many times we could throw the ball 4 yards behind the LOS and have Sims, Musgrave and then a WR out there and completely catch NOBODY off guard, but lose yards on a play!

 

Seriously... I'm building off this and making this a mini "things that are bugging you," thread. THAT... that is bugging the hell out of me. You can get the ball in the WRs hands in other ways. You can STILL run that play, but Jesus, what are you setting up? A fake where someone jumps a route? It's gonna work... or the next time the CB is just going to pick the ball off and go the other way with it. They're basically there on time as it is.

 

Anyway, it sucks losing Sims. I get why they did it. They were concerned with McManus' injury and they just extended him and they didn't want to lose Havrisik. They were hoping for a draft pick for him. 

But now is the time to make the decision. I'll even allow that you couldn't predict Kraft would get hurt and you thought you had depth and weren't using Sims... though even then, Musgraves has had injury issues... I do feel... "better" that we have him to fill in. Kinda in the way I'd feel better if Parsons got hurt knowing we had LVN to fill in... which is to say a good back up but in no world is he stepping up and replacing what you lost.

 

McManus is 1-5 from 40-49. Those have to be gimme's in the modern NFL. One was a block. Not his fault(two may have been blocks but I can only remember the Browns). Also a blocked PAT. 

Havrisik was in a groove. 61 yards. But maybe they don't have confidence in him and are worried about McManus re-injuring his quad? Only explanation. That and they were hoping to trade him... which means, they should probably just go with him.

 

You get 8 players who can come back from IR. We've used 2 designated to returns on Jacob Monk and Marshawn Lloyd(any day now). 
Reed will get one... hopefully. 

That'd have been 4. So you'd have to be careful, but you get 2 more for the playoffs. 

I don't think it's a case of McManus worrying or looking over his shoulder. He's signed a contract. He'll get paid... and he'd be one of the first calls if another team needed one. 

He's just missed them. 

 

[HarryDoyle]

6 hours ago, adambr2 said:

One other beef I’ve got: enough with the crap of carrying two kickers. Nobody does that. Now we had to cut a backup TE, a position that we’re suddenly really thin at, and lost him to the Vikings, because we just couldn’t let Havrisik go.

If McManus is your guy and you believe in him, cut Havrisik and don’t concern yourself with who picks him up.

If you’re sold on Havrisik, then cut McManus and keep Havrisik.

What they’re doing now benefits no one. You have a backup kicker inactive and not contributing to anyone, while you have a starting kicker constantly looking over his shoulder because you’re keeping a second kicker on the roster. Not exactly a vote of confidence.

Make a damn decision and live with it.

Yeah, it makes no sense to release someone to keep a kicker you're not even using on the roster. From what I'm seeing, McManus is still dealing with that injury, and if that's the case, pit him on IR and let Haversik fill in while he completely heals. And if the team knew this when activating McManus for the game, that missed field goal looms even larger and is roster malpractice on the part of whoever is responsible for whoever fills out the game inactive list.

[JosephC]

7 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

I loved Kenny Clark. I didn't think he was expendable, but I certainly thought and... still think that trade was a great trade. I thought this was likely to be Clark's last year in Green Bay given his cap hit.

 

I thought then and still think now, that Jenkins was the odd man out after the move to center.  We'll see if Jenkins is on the 2026 team?  Personally, I think the odds are overwhelming that Jenkins is traded after this season.  With him off the roster, it frees up 20 million in cap space, which would have given them the flexibility to keep Clark.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

7 minutes ago, JosephC said:

I thought then and still think now, that Jenkins was the odd man out after the move to center.  We'll see if Jenkins is on the 2026 team?  Personally, I think the odds are overwhelming that Jenkins is traded after this season.  With him off the roster, it frees up 20 million in cap space, which would have given them the flexibility to keep Clark.

This seems headed toward Josh Sitton territory where he is just cut because the whole league knows he wants out and the Packers want to get rid of him. The way he's played I don't think you're getting anything better than a 6th, and and that's if a team is willing to take his number on. Which they don't have to do if they just wait for him to be cut.

[homer]

I love how they took an all pro guard and made him a mediocre center.

[endaround]

28 minutes ago, JosephC said:

I thought then and still think now, that Jenkins was the odd man out after the move to center.  We'll see if Jenkins is on the 2026 team?  Personally, I think the odds are overwhelming that Jenkins is traded after this season.  With him off the roster, it frees up 20 million in cap space, which would have given them the flexibility to keep Clark.

The reason Jenkins was upset with the move to center was because he knows this is his last season in Green Bay and by becoming a center and not a guard he could lose millions next year.  Jenkins contract reaches the funny money stage next year where he is either restructured or cut.  And since Gute doesn't sign players over 30 , he knows he will be cut.

Clark is the same, he wouldn't be a Packer in 2026.