HiAndTight

I remember there being a lot of love for the guy. I don't recall a whole lot of people(and none on this board) upset that they let go of him. It was almost immediately met with shrugs and the obvious justification that he was a 28-year-old who hadn't really done anything yet. In fact, the most I've heard about him was Rodgers making a comment about the last time he spoke out for a guy, he ended up in Buffalo(which I took as tongue in cheek). But sure, there was a disproportionate amount of love for the guy because he was a WR'er who played CFB in the same state. It's also entirely possible if they'd have kept him, he have 30 catches and 400 or so yards as he would likely have been the #2 or #3 when Adams, Lazard and St. Brown were down at various points this season.

I think Turang may be closer than some expect. Last year he would have spent potentially half the year in AA, which would put him on the doorsteps. It's fair to assume he didn't progress as much as you'd hope(though that may not be true) but it's not like his progress was set back a full year due to injury. His speed, his ability to draw walks, make contact, I think we see him up potentially late this year or the following year. But I've been a huge fan of his for a while. I think he could be a Trea Turner like SS for us, hopefully settling in as a legit leadoff hitter with Hiura and Yelich right behind him.

this is so on point FA for a Brewers fan can get you sick and Frustrating. we need a Salary Cap or else this will always be the way for the Brewers fans. In order for a salary cap you to happen you will have to sit through years of no MLB because the players are not going to agree to this. MLB tried to implement a salary cap but it ended up in the players striking and almost killing MLB. If it meant an NFL-type revenue-sharing agreement, I'd 100 pct be for going a full year or even 18 months without any baseball. The NFL is what it is in large part because Wellington Mara agreed to revenue sharing. Otherwise, MAYBE Milwaukee has an NFL team that's on par with the Jaguars, but GB likely doesn't. This would level the playing field in the sport and would more than makeup for the damage done by the strike.

PFF FA projections; #16-Linsley leaves for the Chargers for for 3/33 with just 10 SB. 44th-Jones to the Dolphins for 4/46 and 15.5 SB(25 fully guaranteed) Kevin King not listed among the top 100. And while the Packers let two stars walk away for pretty reasonable prices, If we're spending nearly 90 million over 5 years, I'd much rather see Allen Robinson(who I think is a very similar WR'er to Adams) or...better yet, just sign the two studs we have on offense that are leaving. But without going back into the whole salary cap debate, I imagine there are very few people buying this type of investment in a WR'er while letting Jones and Linsley walk for what are very affordable salaries in an average year.

No, it was a play where he was running maybe a 15-yard crossing route and there was a LB'er underneath him in coverage. Rodgers put it right on Tonyan, but it looked like the LB'er got his hand up and distracted Tonyan. It was on the 1st series of the game on a 3rd down.

Yeah, but even with the Picks, Howard should have made it. Ramsey's the one who Jaire should have bumped off. PFF, for what it's worth, has Jaire as one of the biggest snubs.

I think you're forgetting about a lot of the drops, particularly early in the season. There was one game in particular that stands out that Sternberger had 2 particularly bad drops in that they were easy catches, Tonyan had one, MVS had a couple. Though he's had a poor catch rate all season long. Also, Dante? I wasn't trying to list each drop, I was providing examples of when the drops were highly impactful (which ironically, that chart was pointing out - lost points based on dropped passes). And you are correct that we had one game where everyone must've used crisco instead of stick-um on their gloves. Pro Football reference also lists the team at 27 drops - but Tonyan had none. So I'm not sure what you are remembering with that one. I'd be curious if you took out that one game and MVS (he obviously has issues with catching consistency) how the rest of the numbers would stack up. I'm remembering the Lions game. And if you took out the worst game every team had and then you took out the WR'er who had the most drops, I'm guessing the list wouldn't look much different. But I don't know that it really matters. https://journaltimes.com/sports/football/packers-look---no-hands-drops-continue-to-haunt-receivers/article_2b1e2f96-2cd6-5040-a1a8-76ae13217ba0.html#:~:text=Rodgers%20has%20long%20said%20that,Lazard%20and%20Marquez%20Valdes%2DScantling.

At that point, it's kinda just preference. Howard had 9 picks this year and he was a lockdown CB. Not a Peters type ballhawk. And Ramsey is a stud who reminds me a lot of Charles Woodson with regard to how physical he plays. I wouldn't trade Jaire for either though. I love the swagger that Jaire brings to the defense, his confidence, the way he just keeps getting better. Jaire Alexander is going to be a very very wealthy man in short order.

I think he meant his best year in Chicago, but PFF literally records every play. They note things like a perfect throw that a WR dropped, a player who didn't make a tackle, but absorbed a double team to free up a LB, etc. It's a much more in depth system than just picking out stats and dividing it by snaps or something. They have a staff of roughly 600 people that does this. If a safety gets roasted on a deep pass in which a cornerback clearly blew an assignment, they may rate the safety a 0 for the play, rather than -2 (everything is graded -2 to +2). All this to say that there are major flaws with just looking at TFL and Sacks and determining a player's value when someone like Mack has 900 snaps a year. Yes, his best in Chicago. Thank you for that. I just don't agree with the idea that the Bears could have used those assets better elsewhere and I still would be thrilled if the Packers had been able to acquire Mack. Everyone knows the Bears problems aren't with Mack, but with their QB. And while PFF isn't perfect and it can be difficult to identify who's actually at fault in a certain situation, it's pretty easy to grade edge rushers. That might be the easiest position to grade in the game as it's straight forward. Did you set the edge vs the run, did you come off and make the tackle, did you beat your blocker and pressure the QB...etc...

Well, they take into account who you have across from you on the line and how often you're double teamed for starters. How often you win your matchup's. A number of things that go beyond just tackles for loss and sacks.

This was actually HIS best year in Chicago. He was the top-ranked edge player in the NFL and had his highest grade during his time in Chicago. His PFF grade this year was 92.3. For a point of reference, Z's grade was 76.7. TJ Watt was second. Mack was better both vs the run and as an edge rusher. The problem with that franchise is NOT Mack. If they just don't trade up for Trubisky, they've got 3 or 4 more 2nd and 3rd round picks. If they take the right QB, then they're probably in the position the Chiefs are right now and people are talking about how their trade for Mack helped put them over the top. Even if they JUST don't trade up for Trubisky, they've got 4 more chances to draft young talent.

I would guess to the players, they view it as remarkable leadership. You're talking about a guy who could very well be out of the league next year and who hasn't made that much money. That's a giant bonus for him to hit. I'm a fan of that move...and I think it's the exact type of thing Rodgers would do.

I think you're forgetting about a lot of the drops, particularly early in the season. There was one game in particular that stands out that Sternberger had 2 particularly bad drops in that they were easy catches, Tonyan had one, MVS had a couple. Though he's had a poor catch rate all season long. Also, Dante?

Nope. Cowboys at 31 then Steelers. Packers at 20 and AZ Cardinals with 9. So dead in the middle. Would be curious to change that to drops/attempt... I'm sure we would show up even better there. http://scores.nbcsports.com/fb/tmleaders.asp?range=NFL&type=Receiving&rank=232 Dropped passes are obviously counted differently by different sites(probably similar to tackles). Next Gen has them with 27 dropped passes. So just behind the Steelers. https://twitter.com/reinhurdler/status/1336725912331685893/photo/1

60 pct on it being year 2 in the offense. MLF runs the same scheme that Shannahan and McVeigh run and in their second years, they've both broken out in a big way. 20 pct on Rodgers. Him deciding to go back and self-scout and work on his mechanics and getting the ball out on time. 10 pct on our young guys developing. MVS, Tonyan, Lazard, St. Brown, and their backs. 10 pct good luck. We've been mostly healthy and when guys have gone down, others have stepped up. I don't actually know if the OL has improved or if we've just got this offense down better and aren't relying on them to pass protect for as long. Maybe Turner got better, but not better than Bulaga from last year IMO. I think we had good OL play, but our offense wasn't able to get going last year and to get the defense guessing enough so that our OL could really impose their will and so that our play-calling couldn't make their jobs easier. But I don't know, all I can see is the stats. That said, Stenavich has done an outstanding job. Patrick has been ready to go, Wagner has been better than last year and Turner has been much better. Runyan performed well in his limited snaps. And Jenkins just keeps getting better. Linsley and Bahk were about as reliable as you could possibly ask for. So maybe I'm underrating them, it's just hard for me to quantify the impact they've had.

Rodgers was honest about his disappointment in the drafting of Jordan Love. He was honest about it taking him a little while to buy in and fully understand Matt LaFluer's offense. So when he says he doesn't need motivation in the form of Jordan Love, I believe him. That and the fact that you don't become one of the greatest to ever do something...whatever that thing may be if you rely that heavily on outside motivators. I think most of us expected that there would be a bit of a learning curve for Aaron Rodgers. I think some might be a little surprised about just how big of a jump they would be able to take in year two with virtually the same offense coming back. Rodgers has talked at length early in the season about looking back at what he could improve upon. Physically, the most obvious seems to be him throwing with his feet under him. He's still capable of throwing from every angle and on the run, but it appeared that he became too comfortable or reliant on that last year. Another obvious difference is him just taking that sure thing. Too often it appears he passed up that TE in the flat for 10 yards and looked for the big play, held the ball too long, and then threw it away or had to try and make a play after the receivers broke off their routes. THAT is a big area he's credited LaFleur and Hackett, and Rodgers also said during those sessions in which they talked, he understood better what they were trying to accomplish. You obviously want big plays, but MLF's offense is built on being in a rhythm. One play building off another. The main play is the outside zone. Pre-snap motion freezes the defense, you can run it, you can run the jet sweep, or you can run play action off of it and that's worked great all year(you can only do that if you have a good running game as you can see how the Rams offense really dipped last year without Gurley and even this year without a dominant running game). So exactly what you're talking about, Rodgers understanding the why...which he again, has said is important to him. Just telling him what to do probably wasn't going to work great at this point in his career. He needed to build some trust and he's obviously done that. And Rodgers has also talked about all the meditation and trying to get his mind right and being in a good place and made some references to a renewed emphasis on having the right people around him. So I think there are a lot of reasons why he's excelling. A natural progression, Rodgers being a big enough person to see his flaws and working to fix some sloppy habits he'd gotten into, and the biggest is just a full understanding of the offense and him being on the same page with his WR's, TE's, RB's, the OL...and that's a credit to the leaders, Rodgers, Hackett and LaFleur. Now, 3 more W's or we haven't really done anything.

[sarcasm]This is because WRs for other teams never drop passes. Only GB WRs drop passes.[/sarcasm] Well...I do think the Packers had the most dropped passes of any team. It was them and the Steelers. Still, Packers WR'ers get the most separation per route or any other team. That tells you they're plenty talented and that's not the issue. I would also guess they're among the best at making contested catches. It's obvious this fan base underestimated the offensive talent we had. Even with the issues MVS has had, he puts pressure on the defense and MLF does an outstanding job scheming guys open. And when all else fails, Rodgers has that connection with Adams that's rare. Similar to the one he had with Jordy...though Adams may even be better. The Bears were the exact type of defense I thought would give them trouble. Dominant pass rusher, another very good edge rusher, dominant big man collapsing the pocket, great speed at MLB'er, and an AP safety. They've dominated them. This team looks better at this point in the year than any Packers team we've had under Rodgers IMO.

I disagree. If it had been Clemson blowing out Ohio st, maybe you'd have an argument, but everything that I saw going into the game was could Ohio st keep up with Clemson, Ohio st didn't belong, and they struggled against Indiana and Northwestern. Florida held it close against bama in the sec championship then got blown out by Oklahoma, though they were depleted. Does that mean they weren't that good or that Oklahoma should have been 4 and could have beaten bama? Cincinnati almost beat Georgia. Are they that good or did Georgia not really care? Sure maybe the top 4 would have all won in blowouts and we would have gotten this result eventually anyway, but I doubt it. I want to see 8 get in so we can sort it out without having to worry about things like did we make a mistake by putting 2 teams in from this conference and leaving out teams from these conferences. You sure about adding 4 teams worse than Notre Dame to the playoff every year? I think you could make a pretty strong argument that teams like GA, Cincy, A&M, Florida are at least as good as ND. And if they're playing in a playoff, you wouldn't see all the NFL talent opting out. Cincy vs Alabama at least provides the potential for a Boise St-Okie matchup type game. Oklahoma was probably one of the 2-3 best teams in CFB that year losing two early-season games, one to Oregon(that got the crew reffing the game suspended they blew it so badly) and Texas.

In fairness to Dabo his point wasn't that OSU wasn't a team talented enough to win it all....they didn't play near a full season slate of games. What this cfp crap has done has given Alabama, Clemson, and OSU and even larger advantage with recruiting that they frankly don't need - everyone knows they will be in the mix, so the best talent flocks to those programs from all over the country - including from the backyards of the big 12 and pac 12 schools that are becoming afterthoughts. Its made the talent gap enormous to the point of it not being worth expanding the playoff field because everyone knows the 2-3 teams that have the most talent. Because of that, opportunity shrinks for other conferences to prove they have teams worthy of playing on that stage. What the bcs format did better than this is put much more weight into schedule strength and gave teams from more regions a chance to move into position when the top schools lost a game. The SEC had the built in advantage (deservedly so) once Alabama became the current juggernaut of having an almost automatic bid for the title game - but it wasn't too long ago when the best title game ever played (IMO) occurred between Texas and USC and that had nothing to do with an SEC school. I'd still personally prefer to go back to the old bowl system and have a series of polls determine their national champs individually than the current 4 team playoff or an expanded one given the current landscape. Right now we basically do have a superconference being bama/sec west, Ohio state, and Clemson - and its hurting the game. I disagree. At least in this system, you won't get a split Champion like the year LSU and USC were clearly the top 2 teams but didn't play each other. And you've always had a disparity in recruiting. It's actually gotten better, not worse in my opinion. You only get 85 scholarships. Bear Bryant used to fill his rosters with 250 players just to keep top prospects away from his competition and schools like ND, Neb, USC, they were all just as dominant. Oregon and Washington have both played in the playoffs in recent years giving their programs opportunities to contend. There's really no excuse for schools like Texas and USC to not be competitive other than incompetence(and impatience.) But before you had the playoff, you had the same dominance. FSU finished in the top 4....what, 17 straight years. Florida won several titles as did Miami. Nebraska went on one of the most dominant 3 year runs in modern history. College Football will always be top-heavy. It's not an equitable system. Wisconsin cannot spend the same as OSU much less a team like A&M or Texas, Alabama, and then there are just the inherent advantages that come with recruiting based on region. I don't see how the playoff has changed anything other than ensuring the top 4 teams make it.

I wonder how they'll handle the RB rotation. Dillon has clearly earned more carries and without Bahk, you'd assumed they'd emphasize the run game more, but the backs are always going to be asked to help chip and stay in to block more. It'll be a good sign of how far they think Dillon's progressed. Also...losing Keke is a big blow for the defense. He was playing as well as just about anyone in the front 7.

We have a shot at the 1 seed. Pittsburgh does not. They are basically taking their bye week this week. But they do have a shot at the 2. Which would guarantee their first 2 playoff games in Pittsburgh. The difference between making a team come to GN vs Pitt likely having to play in Buffalo+ the bye is a pretty significant difference. Earning the top seed should make the Packers the favorites in the NFC. I don't know how much the 2nd and 3rd seed changes the Steeler's outlook. That and a potential 1st round matchup either way with the Ravens, an always physical matchup, would seem to be all the more reason to give them added reason to try to be as healthy and fresh as possible. Pitt and Baltimore is always a brutal slugfest.

Yeah, good for Bahk...bad timing for the Packers. Had they waited another month, he probably still gets extended but obviously not for nearly as much. Beyond the immediate issues it creates, I wonder what it'll mean for their extremely athletic young project Yosh Nijman. Can they get him ready to go by next year? Do they use the 1st rounder on tackle(which is never a bad idea if you hit as you can always find a place to play a talented tackle once Bahk comes back)? Maybe this changes the course of Jenkins career as well. I'd assume he'd be given a chance to play tackle. Runyan's another guy who could get a shot.

My intention was to imply if people new to the NFL understand how the cap works, surely someone who knows the sport as well as the poster I was answering understands how you can create salary-cap space. I thought the tone was pretty much in line with the "I'd love to see your math" comment.

I have seen that he is practicing with the team and that there's a chance. I'm guessing since he was with a team there's not much that needs to be done covid wise since he was being tested anyway. I would guess how much he plays depends on if the coaching staff thinks he knows the defensive line calls. Oh...cool. If he's practicing, he can play. With Keke out, I'd assume he would. I don't know how much DL calls come into play on our front. Usually, it's out OLB'ers looping on stunts, and he'll likely only be in on likely running downs.

Just looked at some highlights. He looks WAY more patient than Watson. Patience is the most underrated skill a RB can has. Taylor was the most patient back I've seen in College. AT least at UW. Generally young guys are not very patient. Hopefully, he steps in and takes the reigns a gives the younger guys some room to grow.