OldSchoolSnapper
-
Posts
12,942 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
29
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Milwaukee Brewers News, Rumors & Analysis
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospect Rankings
Milwaukee Brewers Videos
2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Milwaukee Brewers Trade & Free Agent Rumors
Milwaukee Brewers Fan Guides & Resources
2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project
2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by OldSchoolSnapper
-
2 for Rodgers, 2 for Tony Romo. This is recent within 10 seasons. Romo retired. When Rodgers has it happen a 3rd time, he'll make tge precedence that collarbones are fragile, like ACLs in football/basketball. So figure out for me the trade value total between the two trades, giving us the 20 pick next season. 14/27/3rd/6th for 18/5th/7th&20next year. Romo had serious back problems, his collarbone is not why he retired. You're also aware that Rodgers broke two different collarbones, right? This is average joe water cooler talk. Rodgers collarbone is not an issue. It's one of the more fragile bones in the human body, period, and being driven to ground in the manner he was both times by NFL defensive lineman is going to break it 9/10 times. An ACL is not even on the same planet as this. It's bone, not tissue. You're way off here.
-
2018 Packers Draft Selections and Discussion
OldSchoolSnapper replied to CheezWizHed's topic in Other Sports
Buckley certainly was a better football player than AJ Hawk, who was also drafted 5th and drew about 1/10th the ire. -
Rodgers' collar bone isn't fragile. A bone isn't more susceptible to breaking if you broke it once before. These aren't ligament and tendons, they're bones. He has no greater chance than any other QB to re-injure it. He may be more susceptible generally to getting hurt because of all his scrambling and holding on to the ball, but there isn't some increased risk of re-injury to a broken bone. I further reject that the Packers need to go all in on 2018. It's reasonable that Rodgers has 3 seasons left playing superb football, and that's conservative. He could have another decade in him for all we know. I just can't see the downside to what they did last night. It was pure wizardry what Gute pulled off and the way teams value picks they've just given themselves a bunch of options for the future of the team.
-
Favre had a real tendency to lock in on one WR. I was clamoring for Moss then and it could have been fun but I also think it may have hindered the growth that team went through that season. If nothing else I suppose it would have kept Moss off the Patriots. Less publicized was that the Packers went after Moss again the next season. It's one of those fun "what ifs" but I've never felt certain the Packers were worse off in the end for missing on him. http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/randys-rant-was-almost-a-packer-twice/
-
They don't have a standard, is my point. If that standard existed there's not a chance in hell Letroy Guion is ever on the roster. I suggest reading about what he did to the mother of his child, which the Packers were aware of before he ever put on their uniform. It's easy to cut Mark Chmura when his back is failing him anyway. But Guion was a cheap, productive DL value signing so they looked the other way. And looked the other way again because he played well for them. They're run the same as most franchises. We employ "Packer people" unless they're really good, then they get a few mulligans. McGinn gets cantankerous at times but writing those articles is what he should be doing. I think it's very odd when people come to the defense of the Packers when they sign guys like that. I personally don't concern myself with the character of pro athletes, but when you tote your "values" and sign guys like that it deserves to be put on blast.
-
I'm saying that people who struggle to criticize the Packers even when it is completely justified and who also subscribe to the idea that Green Bay has some moral code it uses to dictate personnel are a lot like the Cardinals fans that do the same. Then the Cardinals manager gets busted drunk driving and the Packers sign guys with some pretty terrible transgressions on their record, indicating this moral high horse is a bunch of nonsense. That attitude receives disdain on this board when it is STL but people don't really acknowledge that a lot of Packers fan are the exact same way. You really don't see any parallels between the two? They're both sort of the "holier than thou" franchises of each league. When former players are saying this stuff about Green Bay I don't think it's something that can just be dismissed. You say "no kidding" but that point was sort of lost on Thompson. If you're going to use the draft for 95% of roster development you better hit on the picks. He was doing that really well until a few seasons ago. Above I listed the Packers Rd 1 picks of the last handful of seasons. You have to hit way better than that if you're going to ignore FA completely.
-
If my memory serves me the last time GB had two first rounders they took Raji and Matthews, and Matthews was at the end of Rd 1, 26th or something. That's the kind of potential you're looking at. In their second year both players led the defense to a title.
-
Brees turns 40 during next season's playoffs, so any injury at all could be the one that makes him say enough is enough. It's also an assumption that the Saints are good again. They were 7-9 three straight seasons as adambr2 just pointed out. Brees doesn't even have to get a major injury. At his age a sore back could doom the Saints to 6 wins. It's also the NFL where teams quite often just surprisingly regress. I don't think it's a stretch that becomes a top 20 pick, and if Brees misses time for some reason it can easily be top 10. Even if the Saints win the Super Bowl it puts the Packers in a great position for a run at twilight of Rodgers' time.
-
2018 Packers Draft Selections and Discussion
OldSchoolSnapper replied to CheezWizHed's topic in Other Sports
This guy is fast. Blazing fast, not quite at the level of Shields but basically nobody is that fast. He's your slot corner and that has been an achilles of the Packers defense for a long time. The Packers know his deficiencies and I'm guessing that they know he's not going to be in a position in this scheme where he's asked to tackle at the line of scrimmage or fight off blocks. Pettine likes having a wiry guy and a smaller shifty guy, now he has both, at least from a measurables standpoint, we still don't know for sure if either one can actually play. It should mark the end of trying to cover Cole Beasleys of the league with Morgan Burnett or LaDarius Gunter. It's speed on speed at a position that has really hurt the Packers a lot. Davon House can't run at all at this point. The more I research the pick the more I like it. If he can contribute and stay healthy it should mean that we aren't giving opponent's a mismatch by forcing Williams or a safety to cover guys they can't run with. The rest of the secondary gets to stay in their comfort zone. The Packers don't win the Super Bowl in 2010 without Shields playing the slot. It gives you so much versatility when you have a speed guy in that role. -
2018 Packers Draft Selections and Discussion
OldSchoolSnapper replied to CheezWizHed's topic in Other Sports
I also don't really care about Alexander's supposed lack of size. Two of the Packers best three corners (Woodson, Shields, Williams) of the last decade were under 6', and this team badly needs an infusion of speed on both sides of the ball. -
Are you trying to troll? Yes, most of us have G&G googles, but that is common with many fans. No. I think there are quite a few similarities. Historically successful franchises, the envy of the other clubs in their division and a baloney pedestal of morality from the front office that trickles through the fan base. The Packers love toting "Packer people" and character guys and about 75% of the fans buy into this. Yet they keep a woman-beating drug dealer like Letroy Guion on the roster as long as his performance justifies it. I mean, you aren't seriously going to deny that are you? There isn't an article about the Packers without a comment about how classy the organization is or how there's no place like GB. Which may be true on some level but there is absolutely a certain self righteousness about the GBP. Not at all unlike STLC.
-
2018 Packers Draft Selections and Discussion
OldSchoolSnapper replied to CheezWizHed's topic in Other Sports
I like the trade no matter what. If Brees is hurt or if the Saints regress significantly (he is 39) it could be incredible value. -
Gotta say I love that move. In the NFL that could easily end up a top 10 pick. But wherever it is i love it.
-
Come to think of it, the Green Bay fan base really is a lot like the STL Cards.
-
Holy hell, stop trying to stereotype every fan from the fan base. All fan bases have these guys. Packers fans are no different. You just lose credibility with this type of crap. It's fluff and it definetely doesn't help you make your point. Nope, nope, and nope. I consider this site the voice of reason but even this place isn't immune to Packerosis. You can find the best discussion on the Brewers here, very levelheaded and rational, but it's damn near impossible to do that with the Packers due to their status in the state. Also, I'm not replying to you here, but I haven't said everyone on the roster is terrible. I've pointed out a bunch of guys I think are good so I don't know that keeps getting brought up.
-
What gets me about Pack fans more than anything: Everyone on the roster is good. There will be a random player everyone hates but for the most part, everyone is a “solid starter.” Burnett, Jake Ryan, Randall, Lowry. So many solid guys. Yet the defense is almost always a cupcake. It’s just odd, you’d think with so many stars and solid starters they’d be really good. It’s almost as if the fans have a delusional gauge on the talent. And yeah, I understand that’s the job of the fans, but people seem to be a lot more rational about the Brewers and Bucks. They can see where their flaws are and address them all the time. But it’s never that way with Green Bay, just something I’ve always noticed. Maybe because it’s harder for most people to identify individual failure in football than the other two sports.
-
You can not buy it all you want, but you said they "graded" as excellent. Who graded them that way if you weren't referring to PFF? You? Mike McCarthy? Sorry but I trust PFF a bit more.
-
2018 Green Bay Packers draft preview and predictions
OldSchoolSnapper replied to LouisEly's topic in Other Sports
I don't follow any college football at all. The only name I know in the draft is Mayfield and only because for a month or two I couldn't escape him. Without doing any draft homework at all I hope they can get more pass rush with the first rounder. No clue how deep that is this year but it can never be oversupplied on a modern NFL roster. As bad as the secondary talent is, an impact rusher will do more to help both areas than a rookie in the secondary. So, if that's possible, a pass rusher, please. -
Draft and develop only works if you draft good players. They haven't. Perry - a good player but inconsistent player who can't stay on the field Jones - Bust Haha - Average Randall - Bust Clark - Hit No 1st rounder Maybe the problem is Capers, since many of their homegrown players have gone on to perform elsewhere. I tend to believe the truth is somewhere in between, Capers scheme was dated and the Packers did not have the edge rushing presence of San Diego (Heyward) or Buffalo (Hyde). The Packers should have been way more active in recent seasons bringing in veteran defensive players to fill gaps. Wilkerson is the perfect example. Thompson's roster-building technique was dated and narrow and it hurt the Packers. Year after year, there were cheap veterans that I would have loved to see brought in, instead the Packers kept trotting out rookies as starters or veterans who were proven not very good players. It's been maddening. They could have been more aggressive in FA had they also not tied up dollars in players like Randall Cobb. Rodgers doesn't need major investments in skill players. You can get $3 and $4mm skill players to produce enough with him. What was most frustrating is that when Ted Thompson would show a pulse it typically worked. Julius Peppers was wonderful for them. Bennett was the only time it really blew up, but that wasn't really that surprising to anybody that's followed his career.
-
I don't think Matthews would be signed as much more than a specialist at this point but yes he would still get signed quickly. He's not what he was but still a productive player. I don't really have an issue with him but he's become the popular lightning rod in recent years because he's a star. He does not produce like a star anymore. Guys like that always end up making more than their production in any sport, it's how being a veteran superstar always shakes out.
-
I'm not the one who used the word excellent originally, for the record. As I said in my post, if you equate 'excellent' to 'elite', then yes, there's confusion, as they're not currently elite. But he said that he didn't think they would even be above average, when they graded-out at a higher level than that even last year. Again, how do you definte 'high quality, then?' Great, instead of excellent? Talk about a silly debate about semantics. Either way, he was significantly discounting the expected performance of Clark and Daniels based on their actual performance last year. Yes it was an odd post since they are 2 of the only guys on defense that any other team would love to have.
-
Which is funny because I've stated numerous times now that I have them pegged at 8-9 wins but for some reason that's causing people to lose their mind. "Rebuild" is relative. Couldn't one say the Packers are rebuilding? They just traded last year's "best" corner and fired their DC. They brought in a big-name TE and a very talented DL who's had attitude problems. They cut a franchise star. When I said they need to rebuild I think it's pretty obvious that I didn't mean trade Aaron Rodgers for draft picks. Maybe this stuff will work out for them. But I don't think Jimmy Graham and a lame duck McCarthy season are going to do much. I also wish they'd also cut Cobb as he's been a total disappointment after getting paid.
-
"Excellent" literally isn't on the PFF grade chart, which is causing the confusion assuming you were referring to PFF grades. It goes from high quality to elite, and I think most people would say "excellent" is closer to elite than high quality. I would say both Daniels and Clark are high quality but not elite, with Clark definitely showing the potential to be elite possibly this season. That guy is an animal with as good of quickness as any interior DL in football.
-
Yeah, whatever. Or I'm the guy who's simply watched this team fail to play average defense for 8 years. It's such BS the way you guys are framing my opinions, like I'm some whackadoodle with no basis for saying this stuff. Seriously, who is a star on the Packers, besides Rodgers and probably Adams? There is not a single guy on the roster who qualifies as a "star." The closest one is probably Kenny Clark at this point, honestly, if we're excluding Jimmy Graham. It's like nobody watched what happened when Rodgers got hurt last year. The roster was exposed for the mediocrity that it is. The Packers should have been investing in defense for the last decade, not paying Cobbs and Nelsons $10mm when Rodgers could have had adequate success with league minimum type veterans. The difference between the Packers and Patriots? They do the latter and invest money at impact positions, or get the last ounce of football from other team's throwaways. Ted's "I'm keeping my guys even if it means overpaying" has hurt the Packers dearly. Before someone says it, no I don't expect Patriot-type dominance, but I definitely feel justified saying they should have played in more than one Super Bowl by now. What's really bugging me about the attitude towards what I've said is that I don't think any of it has been that unreasonable. I literally just said Clark and Daniels are championship caliber guys and that Blake Martinez is a keeper as well. But you can keep on being a jerk about it.
-
I was referring to Burnett, who's most memorable play as a Packer is sliding down in the NFCCG. I've never seen a less effective player held up so high by fans for some reason. He was "the quarterback of the defense!" Yes, well, Hundley was the QB of the offense.
