HiAndTight

That's kinda the whole thing for me. When he had several WR'ers capable of beating their man, McCarthy was fine. With Driver, Jordy, Jennings, Jones, Adams, Cobb. When he didn't have a great core of WR'ers, his offense relied on Rodgers and waaaay too many back-shoulder throws.

Again...this isn't turning into the NBA at all. This is how it's ALWAYS been done. Guys have always done this. Remember John Elway? Also, Stafford isn't really forcing his way out; And I'm not sure this isn't being put out this way so Stafford has more value. There have been reports all year long that they were planning on moving on from Stafford. Let the guy go. Get him the hell out of the Detroit knee biters.

That's true. He is an incredible athlete for a guy who goes nearly 350, but they may be able to catch the Buccs subbing him. I'd think they'd try to play him ~30 pct of the snaps at most. I'm guessing that's one of the things Rodgers looks at when game planning for a team also.

They probably could have plugged and played Gary last year if they'd really wanted to do so. Like the Dolphins with Wilkins or the Buccs with White, and just kinda let him figure it out. I'm looking for a little bit more than just a guy who can get on the field as a rookie. I'd rather take the risk on the guy with the enormous upside.

Keke out and Vita Vea back in? That's a pretty big shift. I'm kinda shocked Vea's back this quickly. That was an ugly injury, but it's gonna be that much tougher to run on them if he's healthy.

I'm convinced now more than ever Thompson's single greatest failing.... Was keeping McCarthy around as long as he did. I'll admit, I thought this was a Andy Reid like situation, McCarthy had just been here too long and things had gotten stale. No...he was just a terrible NFL coach. The talent he had in Dallas, he should have won that division easily, even with Andy Reid Dalton. Meanwhile, Rodgers is 26-6 with MLF in the regular season and is playing his best. Also...Aaron Jones, how many times were fans complaining that we were getting 5 yards a carry and only ran the ball X number of times in the 2nd half? So Bostic and Clinton-Dix...and Peppers telling Burnett to go down and Capers going cover 0 on back to back 3rd downs in OT, all the things that went into it, it's hard not to think about how hampered Rodgers was with McCarthy as his HC all those years.

I'm not suggesting they had some great insight on him, I'm saying all the questions that came with Rodgers(which might not have been fair) and I think this idea that he was this almost sure thing at QB is a little bit revisionist. He was viewed as 1A to Smith, but it wasn't really looked at as a strong QB class(again, I've seen a couple of scouts say both would have gone around 20 in a normal year). So I don't think Thompson knew he was going to be this good, but he gets credit for taking him while everyone else passed. It wasn't lucky in my opinion. It made Thompson's life hell a few years later when Favre retired and then unretired and kinda tore the fan base apart and it wasn't a popular pick when it happened either. I think you're just ignoring the pressure on a GM who has a HOF QB and their teams in the playoffs and he picks...a QB. When you clearly need help elsewhere. Ask Gute how the fans felt about him. And then instead of coming back and going 13-3 and hosting HFA in the playoffs, you go from the playoffs to 4-12 the following year(8-8 the next). I just don't think it was as easy a call as you're inferring. It took a lot of conviction and he knew he'd take a lot of heat for it and that's ignoring what would happen in a few years. Charles Woodson, that was a great move, but it was a contract that didn't have a lot of guaranteed money. That's the easier call for me. They're both historically great moves in Packers history, so of course, it has to come down to splitting hairs and kinda nitpicking. Otherwise, you just say they're equal and that's not as fun in a debate!

I think the narrative regarding the 'last few drafts' is widely accepted, but I don't know if I agree. If the mark of a successful draft is getting '2-3 legitimate NFL players' as I believe Ron Wolf once put it, then 2015 is an admitted disaster. But 2016 brought Clark and Martinez, and contributors in Lowry and Fackrell. 2017 brought King, Williams, and Jones. I think there's a lot of bad feelings about the '17 draft because of passing on Watt, letting Biegel go without really having a chance to contribute, and King's early injury problems, but there's three legit NFL players there, including a dynamic play-maker. I don't fault him for going with King over Watt, but that's likely part of it. We were really struggling to get help at CB at that time. I remember starting a thread asking people how they felt then about passing on Watt and MOST people were happy we got King and Biegel, or at least not upset about it. I didn't see TJ Watt becoming this type of player. I'm talking about Randall, Rollins, Josh Jones, and then he also seemed to struggle on the DL with Kyri Thorton, Adams and Worthy is probably going too far back, but I think people were frustrated with how bad the defense was and even when you talk about some of the hits, Martinez was pretty maligned by fans. A little unfairly...and I would guess most people don't really associate Jones with TT since he really broke out after Gute took over. This doesn't mean it's fair, it's just how people view him. The Packers as a team really dipped at the end of his tenure. But that shouldn't take away from what he did in rebuilding the Packers after they were in cap hell.

I think you're really overstating the problem Josh Jackson is. He's been at worst average since he's come in. We're just pretty solid at GB and he doesn't get a lot of snaps. You're acting like Jackson is Gunter or one of those awful DB's were had when we went to Atlanta in the NFCCG and Gunter was the guy who covered Julio. I do like Tramon...and if he's even close to what he was last year and can give you a few snaps, he should be able to help out in the slot. Maybe they'll try and matchup Sullivan on Gronk and Tramon on Scotty Miller or even AB if he plays. That be obviously a limited number of plays and you're taking a risk in hoping that he's still effective. Much more likely he's just depth.

That...and he was a helluva player just last year. With all the grains of salt that come with PFF grades, he graded out as the 6th best CB in the NFL last year. So if he's in shape and feeling good, he might be able to help. It's kinda funny, I'd hoped the Packers would bring Veldheer and Tramon back and sign Snacks as a FA...which I think most fans did. We just decided we'd wait until the regular season was over to add those three!

Sherrod's game was based on him being so athletic for his size. So that gruesome injury not only stole that from him, but he also didn't get a chance to work on his flaws..which was basically just average strength and run blocking. Thompson was hurt by injuries more than most. Very possible Nick Collins would have been the 2nd HOF'er in that draft class and then Terrance Murphy might have had the most physical talent of any of the WR'ers he drafted. Finley was just breaking out when he suffered his career-ending injury. Can't argue they're part of the game, but it was just a particularly bad run. Throw in Justin Harrell and a few others and I think it's safe to say, that really cost the Packers(though in Harrell's case, they knew he was an injury risk when they drafted him).

I would possibly disagree to say that Charles Woodson was his best move, ironically not a draft pick either. Rodgers was certainly a home run, but he was also in the debate for being 1st overall. The longer he fell, someone was going to snag him. A lot of people thought he was good, it was just a perfect storm for GB of not many teams needing QBs and being down on Rodgers at the last minute. I remember at the time, someone calling that if SF didn't pick him, he would fall to GB. Woodson was very much seen as cantankerous and over-the-hill, but the Packers gave him a lot of money and he was absolutely insane for them. I've still never seen a defensive player, in the secondary no less, with such an ability to change a game. He was just a turnover machine. Woodson was a FA signing for big money and we were the only team that thought he could still play CB. Tampa wanted him to be a safety. So I see your argument, but I think the opinion of Rodgers as a prospect has been a bit exaggerated. I THINK it was Mike Mayock who said he'd fall to the Packers at 24, but he also said both would go in that 15-20 range in a normal year. The scouting reports on him and Alex Smith are just comical at this point...given what we now know. Questions about Rodgers arm strength, his ability to throw the deep ball...which to be fair, Tedford didn't ask his guys to do much, and then knocks about his mechanics and his attitude. The fact that Tedford has 5 or 6 highly drafted QB's like Dilfer, Akili Smith, Carr, Harrington and then Kyle Bollers who was an incredible talent. I think he ran in the 4.5 range, had a cannon for an arm and he was just showing he was a bust and was 3-4 years into his career when the Packers picked Rodgers. When there are that many question marks about a QB and you take him despite having a HOF'er at the position and coming off a playoff season with your QB campaigning for more help on offense, it's pretty gutsy. Woodson was kinda like the Reggie White signing...not in the build-up, but in the impact. To win a DPOY award, become the team leader he did and impact the game like you said, it was incredible. He threw his body around like nobody with his frame should...and he was a stud and he went from a very good player to an All-Time great in GB. But QB's just so much more important, I think that move was the one that really cemented his legacy.

Such a great point. There have long been rumors about Ted's declining health, and suggestions that there were issues near the end of his time as GM, so this isn't stunning though still quite sad. There's still a large segment of the fan base that views him negatively due to the Favre-to-Rodgers 'force-out' despite being clearly vindicated there at this point, plus all of the brutal cap cuts that he had to make in '05 to clean up Mike Sherman's terrible cap situation from his time as GM, leading to the 4-12 season. You can debate and criticize his view on team building, free agency and the like, but the reality is that he transitioned us from one HOF QB to another, which historically rarely happens, and built a perennial contender and XLV championship. He should be viewed as not much less significant than Ron Wolf, but I think the fans don't see it that way. Wolf made some splashier moves and then TT's final few drafts weren't that great. So that hurt his legacy a bit. I think if you compared them...Thompson was pretty incredible at finding high-end starters in the middle rounds...and his first-round picks weren't so bad either. Wolf was a little better taking fliers on guys, but his first-round picks were bad. TT could be a bit frustrating, but he picked Bahk, Linsley, Jones in the mid-rounds just among the key guys still playing. He did bring in C-Wood, Pickett and had an incredible run in the draft the first half of his tenure, so you have to appreciate what he did for the team.

Fixed. Yup. Provided you don't allow the facts to get in the way.

Wait a minute, did you just anoint Mahomes as one of the best two QBs in NFL history? That might be a little premature maybe? If you said Brady and Rodgers, that wouldn't have made me cringe, that is at least a formative argument, but Mahomes top two, EVER? Saying Rodgers and Mahomes are arguably the two most TALENTED QB's in NFL history makes you cringe? Mahomes is objectively more talented than Brady. It's not premature. If someone said it was the two greatest QB's of all time, that'd be premature, but Mahomes threw for 50 TD's his first year starting, won an MVP. Came back and dislocated his knee and won a Super Bowl MVP and in his third year would be on his 2nd MVP if not for one of the 3-4 greatest seasons in QB history and led his team to a 15-1 record. He's pretty well established he's one of the most talented people to play the position.

Who plays more years from right now, Brady or Rodgers? Obviously, it would seem like an obvious question, but with Tampa, the way they're building that OL...as Oldschool said, he might still be playing at 48. Whatever the answer, I hope the idea of the Packers trading Rodgers after next season hasn't just been destroyed but thrown into a wood chipper that spits it into a crematorium. Feels like Rodgers should have 3-4 really good years left if he's healthy...and then a few years left where he's still good enough.

It was definitely Saban(which I only remember because I just watched a profile on him the week before the CFB Title game). He wanted Brees and when he failed his physical, he said it helped him realize how little control he had in the NFL compared to in College. He couldn't overrule the medical staff as Wolf did with the Favre trade.

Since Gronk has already said he's coming back, you have to assume that he knows Brady is. I don't know if he'll play 4 more years...but it wouldn't shock me. Especially if he stays in Tampa with all the talent they've got. They just added a stud RT in Wirffs who could move to the left side and he has an incredible WR'ing core even if AB doesn't come back. I thought he'd have been better off going to SD and SD using their pick on Simmons, or Indy. Football's had to predict, but Brady playing and being in a Championship game...seems inevitable at this point.

I think the reason I'm more nervous than usual is that I think we SHOULD win. I was just happy to be in the NFC Championship game last year but I figured if GB won it'd be lucky. Maybe the team felt the same way Yeah...this^^^ Happy to be in the NFCCG last year and hoped we could figure it out. Happy to make it vs the Falcons and thought back to 2010 and hoped we could win. This team SHOULD win and would that makes it so much worse. Like...losing due to an onside kick with a SB trip on the line.

If the cap does stay at 176 this year..AND we add a 17th game, I think everyone will be fine by next off-season. You could see a potential 100 million dollar cap increase if everything goes back to normal, and we add a 17th game. But the posturing is already starting. Pro Football Talk is saying they believe it'll be around 195...which would hold the cap down in the future by pushing some of those problems off. They've already done that just by agreeing to the 175 cap floor. If they just went by the numbers, the cap would be closer to 120-125 and really screw teams up. It might be best if we just suck it up and deal with the financial implications this year, especially since I believe that'll hurt some other teams worse than us, but you're really hurting a lot of NFL Veterans in that situation. But as you said...lets figure that out after the parade!

No...and I do think they've missed a beat. Having Bahk...when healthy, it allows you to use your other 4 guys to do whatever they need. Double a guy like Donald(when healthy), slide over and help out if you've got a stud over Wagner. It's like having a stud CB that takes away one half of the field. Without Bahk, the Packers have to be very careful with their playcalling and they could be in real trouble if they get behind. We just haven't been in that situation yet. A franchise and potential HOF'er at LT? If we'd have known he was going to get hurt, then obviously, but the elite LT's can play well into their 30's in the NFL. We just saw a really good LT who was 38. Trent Williams is dominant still despite missing a year. Maybe my mind will change after this week, but with an elite edge rusher with JPP and last years sack leader in Barrett, we'll get a better idea just how good Turner is. I do think they overpaid for Bahk a bit. I would have expected a bit more of a team-friendly deal(not a discount, but not MORE than Tunsil who had a TON of leverage got). He wasn't getting anywhere near that in free agency. But because it's a LT, I get it. I would expect the Packers to use a pretty high pick on both CB and OT in this draft. Maybe not the 32nd pick in the trade(hopefully) but at least one of the 4th rounders.

Yes, I'd do that deal as well. The Cook/Kamara deals came after Gordon, though, and I'd think that type of money would be the bar for Jones at this point. Gordon's deal was pretty much the worst-case situation obviously. I'd think Jones is a step behind Cook and Kamara, but RB can be a fickle market. The problem is when RB's actually enter free agency, they seldom really cash in. I have no idea what he ends up getting. He IS a level below Cook and Kamara and if we would have had fans, the Packers probably would have paid him accordingly, but it's not. IF he were willing to sign a 5 year 60 million dollar deal and we only had to guarantee ~15 million of it, that'd be perfect. I think having Jones and Dillon is just a best-case scenario and could help take our offense to the next level. I think I mentioned this elsewhere, but PFF had Jones getting 4/46. That feels about right this year(25 guaranteed). Linsley 3/33. And King not on the top 100. And they had Will Fulller going to GB for 5/87.5. So like all things PFF-related, it's to be taken with a grain of salt.

Though I agree that 'cap hell' doesn't accurately describe the Packers' situation, and assuming you're referencing Barnwell's article, his supporting materials put the Packers at 28th of the 32 teams in cap space, one of ten negative teams. And of the playoff teams, only the Saints (who, as you note, have a horrid and unmanageable disaster with the cap) and Steelers are below them. Yes, the moves noted above gets them to literally zero. But they'll have to get mighty creative to a) create the necessary space to actually sign their draft class, and B)make any sort of moves to either re-sign their other FAs or to bring in anyone to address a need. So, not cap hell, but certainly not a rosy picture. Bahktiari's restructure is a bit puzzling to propose as well. The Packers knew what the cap situation was, and signed him just a few weeks ago. Why would they then convert a roster bonus into a signing bonus, when they simply could have done that a few weeks ago when he signed the contract? Yes, but look at the FA's most of the teams have? They have quite far more free agents and far bigger questions. The Packers had Jones, Linsley and King. The Steelers for example had Dupree, JuJu, both their tackles, Hilton, Conner...and others. Tampa has Gronk, Goodwin, Barrett, AB, their RB's, Lavonte David...and others. And the obvious answer to why they wouldn't have done that with Bahk a few weeks ago, they're probably waiting until they know what the cap is actually going to be. The NFL is pushing for a longer season. It's obvious there's going to be negotiations between the two sides this off-season.

I don't know BB technique beyond just being a fan having never played it. So maybe someone who's coached or played can explain why Giannis ever changed his shot? Just a quick search I found this video; Which sounds good...again, for someone who never really played or coached the sport. I've seen people talk about how he's wrecked his shooting motion, but if he was just the shooter he was as a rookie from 3, we'd be good. This might be an area that's already been covered on here, but he looks so robotic shooting the 3 now. To think he finished his rookie year hitting 50 pct over his last 20 games and now with wide-open shots he regularly airballs them makes me think this guy might be right.

What? Are you basing this on his "slow" start to the year? Help me understand your argument since he is coming off back to back MVPs and a DPOY award. I think the only problem with Giannis is he's not a typical number 1. He's closer to a Shaq, but obviously so much differently. I think we're fine now with Middleton and Jrue able to handle the ball in the final minutes.